Proceedings of the ... National Conference on City Planning

PROCEEDINGS

SEVENTH NATIONAL CONFEUK\< IE

ON CITY PLANNINf,

DETROIT

_J

RBORl

Presented to the
library of the

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

from
the estate of

AUTIIUH KELLY

PROCEEDINGS

OF

THE SEVENTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON

CITY PLANNING

PROCEEDINGS

OF THE

SEVENTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE

ON

City Planning

DETROIT

June 7-9, 1915

BOSTON: MCMXV

THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, CAMBRIDGE, U. S. A.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The City Plan Defined by a Municipal Engineer. Nelson P. PAgb
Lewis, Chief Engineer, Board of Estimate and Apportionment,
New York City 1

An Architect's View op City Planning. R. C. Sturgis, Presi-
dent American Institute of Architects, Boston 13

The~City Plan op Detroit. Edward H. Bennett, Consultant in

City Planning, Chicago 21

Six Years of City Planning in the United States. Flavel Shurt-

leff, Esq., Secretary of the Conference 33

Best Methods of Land Subdivision

Introduction, John Nolen, Member American Soc. of Landscape
Architects, Cambridge, Mass 247

Report of Conference Committee. Presented by E. P. Good-
rich, Consulting Engineer, Borough of Manhattan, New York . 45

Report of Local Committees

Newark Report. Presented by Harland Bartholomew, Sec-
retary City Plan Commission 56

Philadelphia Report. Presented by Joseph Johnson, Bu-
reau of Survey, Philadelphia 62

Louisville Report. Presented by J. C. Murphy, Member

American Institute of Architects 66

Point of View of the Real Estate Developer. Paul A.
Harsch, Toledo * 71

Discussion

Led by Lee J. Ninde, Chairman City Planning Committee,
National Assn. of Real Estate Exchanges; King G. Thomp-
son, Columbus, O 80

Architectural Side of City Planning
Papers by:

Frederick L. Ackerman, Member American Institute of Archi-
tects, New York City. A. A. Stoughton, Member American
Institute of Architects, Winnipeg. George B. Ford, Chair-
man Town Planning Committee, American Institute of Archi-
tects 107

[v]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Constitution and Powebs of a City Planning Authority. Robert PAai>
H. Whitten, Secretary City Plan Committee, Board of Esti-
mate and Apportionment, New York City 135

Some Aspects op City Planning Administration in Europe. Frank

B. Williams, Esq., New York City 144

Discussion

Led by Thomas Adams, Town Planning Adviser, Commission of
Conservation, Ottawa. A. L. Brockway, Chairman City Plan
Commission, Syracuse. Austin H. McGregor, President City
Plan Commission, Newark 155

Remarks at the Closing Dinner

Charles Moore, Toastmaster, Chairman Commission of Fine
Arts, Detroit. Edward M. Bassett, Esq., Chairman Com-
mission on Heights of New York Buildings. Cass Gilbebt,
Member Commission of Fine Arts, New York City. Thomas
Adams, Town Planning Adviser, Commission of Conservation,
Ottawa. Andbew Wright Crawford, Esq., Secretary Art
Jury, Philadelphia 201

Cooperation in City Planning. The transactions of a conference

of national associations interested in the subject of City Planning 231

Meeting 241

Appendices

A. Best Methods op Land Subdivision 247

B. Constitution and Powers of a City Planning Authobity 274

[vi]

THE CITY PLAN DEFINED BY A
MUNICIPAL ENGINEER

Nelson P. Lewis

Chief Engineer, Board of Estimate and Apportionment, New York City

Owing to the unfortunate indisposition of the Chair-
man, the Vice-Chairman finds himself down on the program
for an address. When advised of this, the first thing he
did was to look over the proceedings of earlier conferences
in order to see what Mr. Olmsted had said or rather what
he had left unsaid. The general impression gained was
that he had very completely covered the field and that there
was little left for the present speaker. Perhaps he might
attempt to write an overture to the performance which is
to follow, indicating briefly the ground to be covered by
the papers, discussions and reports which are to be pre-
sented; but that might be unfair to those who have pre-
pared them, unless it be that their completeness and thor-
oughness might be emphasized by the very superficial man-
ner of the attempted outline.

I have concluded to present a few observations, not on
city planning as commonly understood, but on the city
plan, and endeavor to indicate what it is ; and these obser-
vations will be those of a municipal engineer who, while
he may not have the artistic ideals so happily possessed by
other members of the Conference, has had strongly im-
pressed upon him a realization of the shortcomings of the
conventional plans of his own and of other American cities,
most of which, it must be confessed, have been made by
engineers or rather by surveyors. What then is this thing
that we speak of as a city plan? The idea most commonly
conveyed by the term is a map showing the boundaries of

[i]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the city and the street system which already exists and
such streets as have been laid out for future development.
It is primarily a map, the basis of which is a survey. The
Charter of the City of New York describes the city plan
as a permanent map " showing the parks, streets, bridges
and tunnels, and approaches to bridges and tunnels as
heretofore laid out, adopted and established pursuant to
law, and the maps and profiles included in or accompany-
ing the same showing the grades of such streets duly fixed,
adopted and established." The preparation of such a plan
is little more than surveying, more or less precise survey-
ing, it may be, but it may involve little study of the needs
of the community, little sympathy with the traditions and
ideals of its people, little exercise of imagination as to its
future development and requirements. A plan of and for
a city is not simply a map showing the streets, parks,
bridges and tunnels and their approaches " as heretofore
laid out, adopted and established pursuant to law." That
is chiefly a record of what has already been done and can-
not be changed without great expense; a record of the
mistakes which have been made through lack of foresight
and imagination. Not that such mistakes were necessarily
due to stupidity, for a generation ago no one could have
foreseen the marvelous development of our cities or the
great social and economic changes brought about by recent
inventions which have so greatly facilitated transit and
other means of communication. The city plan as above
defined is too minute as to details and ignores the city as
a whole, not only as it is, but as it will be.

A real plan is rather the general system of arterial
streets and transportation lines by which the different sec-
tions of the existing and the future city will be connected
with each other and with centers of population outside of
the city limits ; parks and open spaces and other resorts
for recreation and amusement; the existing water front
development and the space needed for its further increase;
existing public and semi-public buildings and sites for those

[2]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

which may be required in the future. This is the real city
plan which will control future development, stimulating
it or retarding it as the case may be. The block dimen-
sions and angles, the widths of minor streets and the sub-
division into a vast number of rectangular blocks of stand-
ard size, with an explanation of or an apology for every
departure from that standard do not constitute the city
plan, the Charter of the City of New York to the contrary
notwithstanding. The city plan is something bigger and
broader. It is something to which the city may grow, not
something to which it must be restricted or within which it
must be confined as in a strait jacket.

The economic considerations which should control city
planning are precisely those which should prevail in the de-
sign of a house, shop, railway terminal or water supply
system ; namely, adaptation to probable or possible increase
in demand and capacity to supply that demand. If the
manufactory or the railway is foreordained to failure, the
less expended upon it the better. There are a few towns
which were laid out during " boom " periods on lines which
were fancied to be those of a future metropolis, where the
broad streets are grass grown, where the public buildings
are but half occupied and where everything speaks of a
splendid ambition which resulted in grotesque failure.
When a city, occupying a strategic position, has begun a
natural development which causes growing pains indicative
of a misfit in its general plan, it is time to look toward the
future, to adjust the plan to new conditions and to provide
for still further growth. To tear down and enlarge is very
costly, especially so when there is no room for enlargement
without the purchase of additional land which has become
far more valuable than when the original enterprise was be-
gun. This is constantly being done by individuals and cor-
porations whose domestic or business requirements make it
necessary. In any case it involves a distinct loss which may
be justified by the means of indulging in a luxury or by
the prospect of increased profit. Cannot the city, it may

[3]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

be asked, instead of trying to provide for the remote future,
well afford the expense of reconstruction to adapt itself
to its growing needs, especially when it has the power,
through its ability to levy taxes and assessments, to impose
the cost of the necessary changes upon the property which
will be chiefly benefited? No expense involving the de-
struction of property can be justified if it can be avoided
by the exercise of reasonable forethought, and the taxing
power of the city should not be used unnecessarily. The
requirements of the modern city are so great that the
burden of taxation will inevitably be heavy. Improvements
in the city plan may increase values to such a degree that
they would be cheap at almost any price, but if the plan
could be so made as to avoid the necessity for destructive
changes, both the city_at large and the individual property
owner will be the gainers. To defer the correction of mis-
takes which are quite apparent in well developed sections
of the city or to put off the adoption of a broader policy
for those in process of development because land is ex-
pensive and costly improvements would be destroyed is not
unnatural even though unwise. To fail to take advantage
of such object lessons in parts of the city where there are
few, if any, improvements or where the street plan has not
yet been definitely fixed is the height of folly.

Few writers on city planning have defined the elements of
a comprehensive city plan, and most of those doing so have
laid special emphasis upon the organization and administra-
tion of the city, particularly its social activities. The
convenience and attractiveness of a city will depend con-
spicuously upon four features of its physical plan.

The first of them is the transportation system, or the
means provided for getting in and out of the city, and for
quick movement of passengers and freight from one part
of the town to another. It is obvious that transit needs
cannot be accurately foreseen, but provision should be made
for improving and extending them when needed. A large
part of the transportation will always be in the streets

[4]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

themselves, and its adequacy and efficiency will be largely
determined by the location and dimensions of the streets
in which the intra-urban transit lines are located. The
difficulties which are presented in providing an adequate
system of transportation within a city lacking in streets
sufficiently wide to accommodate them is admirably illus-
trated by the case of the two track rapid transit subway
about to be built under William Street in New York City.
This street is 40 feet wide and the width of excavation re-
quired for the subway is 29 feet, which at stations will be
increased to the full width between building lines. The
depth of the subway will vary from 25 to 31 feet below the
surface and in general will be from 3 to 5 feet below
mean high tide, reaching at one place a depth of 14 and at
another place 20 feet below high water. The estimated
cost of this one-half mile of railway, based upon the lowest
bid, is $2*,254,670, or about $850 a linear foot.

The great cost of this work is in large measure due to
the fact that it was necessary to underpin the foundations
of a number of tall buildings, 45 of which under 7 stories
in height have an assessed value of $7,000,000, 20 of from
7 to 12 stories are assessed at $18,000,000, and 10 from 13
to 20 stories in height have an assessed value of $15,-
000,000. It will be difficult to find a more forcible illustra-
tion of the need of providing in the plan of a city sufficient
streets whose position will make them available for rapid
transit routes and whose widths will be sufficient to permit
the construction of such lines without an expense which
would be prohibitive in most cities.

The second feature is the street system in and through
which the daily business is done and, by which the people
gain access to their homes and pass from these homes to
their work, recreation and amusement. A street system
once adopted and developed must remain indefinitely.
While some streets may be widened and an occasional new
street may be cut through existing improvements, the gen-
eral street plan, once established and constructed, is fastened

[5]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

upon the city as long as the city itself lasts. A catastrophe
such as the great fire of London in 1666 or the San Fran-
cisco fire in 1906 may afford an opportunity for a recast-
ing of the plan for a considerable area, but it is seldom
availed of.

Few cities have a street system which has been planned
as a unit. In Europe they have had their beginning in a
cluster of houses built under the shadow of a feudal castle.
In this country the most fortunate of them have had their
beginning in a New England village green, which has made
an admirable starting point. The plans for subsequent
additions have often been a matter of chance. There are
a few instances where plans were made in anticipation of
many years of growth, one of the most conspicuous being
that of New York, which in 1807 authorized the preparation
of a plan covering all of Manhattan Island. The consid-
erations which determined the character of this plan, as
outlined in the report of the commission, are interesting.
They debated whether or not they should follow the con-
ventional system of planning a city by dividing it into a
great number of rectangular blocks or whether they should
adopt some other general plan. After careful considera-
tion they reached the conclusion that " a city must be
composed principally of the habitations of men and that
straight-sides and right-angled houses are the most cheap
to build and the most convenient to live in. The effect
of these plain and simple reflections was decisive," and
New York has suffered ever since from the limitations im-
posed upon it by this checkerboard plan which, while it
may permit the building of houses which are cheap and
convenient to live in, makes movement about its streets
anything but convenient. At the time this commission made
its report Major L'Enfant had produced his admirable
plan for the national capitol of Washington, and even a
century and a half before that time plans had been pro-
posed for the rebuilding of London after the great fire of
1666 which recognized the defects of rectangular planning

[6]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

and the advantages of the creation of focal points and
radial and diagonal streets. These radial streets and
circumferential thoroughfares are conspicuous features of
many European cities, and their wisdom in providing for
them has often been pointed out, but too much credit should
not be given them. They were formerly walled cities, and
within the walls there were narrow streets, extreme conges-
tion and the worst possible sanitary conditions. A few
highways led out of the city through the walls and into
the open country, but these were not designed as arteries
of traffic required by and contributing to peaceful com-
merce; they were routes of advance against or retreat be-
fore attacking forces or were designed to facilitate preda-
tory raids. When peace rather than war became a normal
condition and the city walls could safely be demolished
and the moats filled up, the possibility of converting the
space occupied by them into great ring streets or boulevards
and their peculiar availability for this purpose became
apparent. But few towns in America have old walls which
they can convert into such streets, yet their advantages
are so obvious that they are being planned by many great
cities, some of them at enormous cost for land and build-
ings which must be destroyed and with entire disarrange-
ment of the existing street system. One of the character-
istics of such city planning, as has been done in this coun-
try, is the adoption of a standard lot and block unit and
the combination of these standard blocks into series which
will determine the location of what are to become the
secondary and even the principal arteries of traffic. This
is a reversal of the natural and the logical method in which
a city should develop. The standard lot and block is a
habit which has persisted with no very good reason. The
lot unit may differ in different cities, but once adopted it
has been adhered to with surprising fidelity in each city.
In New York this lot unit is 25 by 100 feet ; in Chicago it is
25 by 125 feet; in Philadelphia the blocks were originally
laid out 400 feet square and many of these have been sub-

[7]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

divided by two separate streets each 40 feet wide into three
blocks 400 feet long and about 107 feet wide. After pro-
viding narrow passages 3 feet wide through the center of
each of these long blocks, the resulting lots are about 52
feet deep and many of them are but 14 feet wide, the
minimum width of lot for a dwelling house which is per-
mitted by the city ordinances, resulting in provision for
168 separate buildings on this original block, or at the
rate of 46 buildings to an acre. If the arterial and sec-
ondary streets had first been located in a rational manner
and the subdivision of these areas had been controlled by
them1 instead of being allowed to control them, many of our
cities would have more distinctive character and would be
far more attractive and livable.

The third element includes the park and recreation facili-
ties, upon which the comfort and health of the community
are to a large degree dependent. It is true that a lack of
proper parks may be supplied at any time, even when the
space to be devoted to that purpose shall have been built
upon and when the cost of their acquisition will be greatly
enhanced, but a park system can be most economically and
satisfactorily established in advance of other improvements,
and facility of access to them and proper connections be-
tween the different park units will depend upon the street
system, so that the park plan should be worked out in con-
nection with the street plan.

The future park needs of a city cannot be accurately
anticipated. They will depend upon the density of popu-
lation and the occupation of the people. The industrial
town or district obviously needs a greater park space than
a high class residential district, and yet it usually has less.
Mr. Charles Downing Lay, formerly landscape architect of
the New York Park Department, estimates the park needs
of a city of 100,000 population at 1500 acres, or 12% per
cent of the city area. This would mean that with a den-
sity of population of but 8% persons to the acre there
would be one acre of park to every 66% people. Statistics

[8]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of 22 cities varying in size from London to Rochester,
N. Y., show an average density of population of 30.5 per
acre, a park area of 6.32 per cent that of the city and one
acre of park to 483 persons. Variations, however, are ex-
treme. Berlin, with a density of population of 133 to the
acre, has 7 per cent of its area in parks, or one acre of
park to 2014 persons. In London, with a density of 60,
9 per cent of the area is devoted to parks, or one acre to
677 people. In New York these figures are 28, 4 and 689
respectively; in Washington they are 9, 14 and 68, while
Kansas City has a density of population of only 8 to the
acre and has 5 per cent of its area devoted to parks, or
one acre to 144 persons. In providing park areas for the
future city it is very advantageous to buy acreage property
in anticipation of future needs ; out of these areas the parks
can be made and the surplusage, if any, may be sold at an
advanced price which will go far toward meeting the cost
of the park investment. *

The fourth element referred to is the location of public
buildings, which may render the conduct of public business
convenient or difficult and may give a favorable or unfavor-
able impression to visitors. Public buildings like business
buildings can be changed in location as necessity and con-
venience may require, but the suitability of their sites,
whether they are convenient and commanding or awk-
ward and unprepossessing, will depend upon the streets
about them and leading to them, so that the location of
these buildings should receive the most careful study in
the preparation of the general plan of the city.

The location of public buildings is a subject which
has received not too much attention, but a proportion-
ately greater share of study than have the other ele-
ments which have been enumerated. A visitor to a city
cannot appreciate the merits or defects of its street
system until it has been studied, but the dignity and
the effective arrangement of its public buildings will at-
tract attention at once. But why confine the study of

[9]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

this problem to the great buildings, the City Hall, the
Court House, the libraries, the museums, the university,
and leave the location of the subordinate buildings to
chance? And yet this is the practice which is usually
followed even in the most ambitious schemes for citj7
planning. Why should not certain municipal blocks be
set aside for the accommodation in one block of a high
school, a grammar school, a branch library, a public
bath; in another block a police station, a fire engine
house, a municipal garage or stable, and a repair shop?
These various buildings could be designed to harmonize
with each other and the city would acquire a distinction
by such grouping, while the expense of heating, mainte-
nance and repairs would be considerably decreased. As to
buildings of a semi-public character, such as railway sta-
tions, places of amusement, churches, etc., if the street sys-
tem is so planned as to furnish advantageous sites which
would permit buildings of this character to be seen to advan-
tage and through which they could be conveniently ap-
proached, they would doubtless be availed of for the purpose.

There are many other details which, while less funda-
mental than those already referred to, are of the utmost
importance, such as the proper proportion of roadway
and sidewalks to afford the maximum of accommodation
for the kind of traffic on each street, the design and loca-
tion of lamp posts and the effective lighting of the streets,
an intelligent plan for tree planting which will result in
the best results so far as the appearance of the streets are
concerned and will at the same time give the trees a fair
opportunity to grow, the location and maintenance of un-
derground structures so as to reduce to a minimum the
mutilation of street pavements in order to gain access
to them. These, however, might be called questions of
administration which must be met and solved long after the
general plan of the city has been determined.

The responsibility of the municipal engineer for the
future planning of our cities is very great, and at the

[10]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

same time an opportunity is presented which should be
welcomed. The exercise of vision arid imagination on
their part has too often been deemed a dangerous incur-
sion into a field foreign to their proper activities, and yet
the engineer is the first man on the ground in laying the
foundations upon which our cities are to be built. He has
been too prone to regard this preliminary work as a mere
matter of surveying and he has been more intent upon
the accuracy of his measurement of lines and angles and
of his computation of areas than upon the larger problem
of providing for the orderly and sightly development
of the city. His eyes have been so closely fixed upon the
drawing board that he has seldom looked up to catch a
vision of the great city that is to come, the complex
organism known as the modern city with its varied activi-
ties, its difficult social problems, its ugliness or its beauty,
its awkwardness or its convenience, its capacity to debase
or to elevate its citizens. Every blunder that he makes
will afford an opportunity for some one else to win ap-
plause for a plan to correct it through large expenditure
of public funds. It often seems as if the admiration ex-
cited by what are commonly called city planning projects
is in direct proportion to the amount of destruction of
existing improvements and the extent of the disarrange-
ment of the existing plan which may be involved. If
you are going to dream, we are told, dream a big dream
and the people will look and admire; but these big dreams
appear always to involve the spectacular making over of
a big city and rarely the planning of a city not yet come
into being or even of a city which is just beginning to give
promise of rapid growth, although still in a formative state.
Planning of this latter kind will not bring applause ; genius
devoted to such work will not win prompt recognition. The
merits of such a constructive plan may not be appreciated
during the lifetime of the man responsible for it. L 'Enfant
died many years before his plan for Washington was real-
ized to be anything more than a fanciful sketch.

[ii]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

The speaker does not envy the architect who offers an
ingenious and effective solution of a difficulty caused by
lack of foresight in city planning, but he deplores the
fact that such blunders have been so commonly made by
engineers, and more particularly the fact that the en-
gineers are so inclined to go on repeating the same mis-
takes. The making of a comprehensive plan for the
future development of a city or for correcting the obvious
defects of an existing plan is not the work of a few weeks
or months or even years. It is more likely to be the
result of many years of patient work, and the men who
did it will be forgotten before it is finally carried out.
It is no one man job and it is never actually finished.
However carefully and skillfully the first plan may have
been made, unforeseen changes will take place, new
methods of transportation will be developed, new inven-
tions will powerfully affect the social life of the com-
munity, and the plan, where still susceptible of change,
must be modified to meet these changed conditions. The
groundwork of a comprehensive city plan must obviously
be laid by the regularly employed technical staff of the
city with the aid of special expert advisers; but the or-
ganization created for this purpose should be carefully
selected. It should contain men who are familiar with
the past history and traditions of the community and
are in sympathy with them, but who can appreciate chang-
ing conditions and adapt the old to the new without de-
stroying it. The work should be directed by men who do
not think the exercise of imagination an engineering
crime; men who are enthusiasts without being doctrin-
aires; men who are content to do their work well without
hope of popular applause and who are willing to await
the verdict as to their work which will be rendered by coming
generations. They will not, however, be obliged to wait
indefinitely for recognition if they manifest an intelligent
interest in this subject and an appreciation of its
importance.

[12]

AN ARCHITECT'S VIEW OF CITY PLANNING

R. Cupston Sturgis
President, American Institute of Architects, Boston

I appreciate very much indeed this opportunity, almost
a chance opportunity, to be with you here tonight and to
speak to you about a subject that you have very much at
heart and that I also am extremely interested in, although
I am quite willing to confess myself quite ignorant about it.
And it is because I feel more or less of an amateur about
city planning, and because I do not know very much about
the subject and have not given it the sort of study that it
deserves, that I feel quite free to talk about it.

It seems to me that town planning has two very distinct
elements, without which it cannot be successful. And I
am going to dwell, if I may, for just a few minutes on two
thoughts: one, that it requires that commonest of all
qualities, common sense, and the other that it requires con-
tinuity of policy, a thing of which we so seldom see any
sign in this country.

Common sense then, should be applied to this question
of laying out streets in a city thoroughfare for the pur-
pose of getting from point to point, for the purpose of
allowing the people and the traffic, in such numbers as
may be naturally aligned in certain districts, through from
one point to another. If they are going to be laid out on
perfectly level land, it seems reasonable enough that streets
should be laid out rectangularly. If they are laid out on
undulating land, it seems perfectly reasonable that they
should be laid out as you naturally walk or drive or lay
out the roads, if you are not an architect or engineer, in
the simplest and easiest way to get from point to point.

[13]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

So those two methods have been spoken of as if they were
to be methods that were in conflict and as if the checker-
board pattern was one scheme and had its enthusiastic sup-
porters in the dark ages perhaps, and that another scheme
that departed from the checkerboard had its enthusiastic
supporters today. It seems to me that they are both logi-
cal under certain circumstances. What we really desire is
an easy and direct way of getting from point to point. And
the checkerboard, as a matter of fact, is not an easy way,
and however clear and accurate it appears to be, as a mat-
ter of fact a city laid out on the checkerboard plan is the
most confusing place to find your way about in that
there is.

It is quite as difficult for the stranger to find his way
about in the part of New York that is absolutely checker-
board— well not quite as difficult, but nearly as difficult
— as it is for him to find his way about in Boston.

Now regularity tends to confusion, while irregularity,
as a matter of fact, tends to distinctness and allows one to
find one's way readily. I venture to say that it is far
easier for a stranger, after a few days in London, to find
his way about there because it is irregular, because it is
marked at various points by squares and circles so distinc-
tive that when he reaches them he recognizes them and so
knows where he is.

So that it seems to me that common sense more than any-
thing else is required in the laying out of city streets so
that they will serve the actual needs, meet the actual con-
ditions of the contours and the actual needs of the people
that are going to use the streets.

The other purpose of the streets is to bound lots, the
places that are left for building. Of course it is perfectly
true, as our early ancestors in New York pointed out, that
a square house is the convenient house to live in. But, as
a matter of fact, it really does not matter tremendously
whether we live in an absolutely rectangular room or not.
I venture to say that nine out of ten of us would go into a

[14]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

room that was askew, and that was well furnished and con-
veniently arranged, without ever having it borne in upon
us that the angles were not right angles. We don't ap-
preciate things of that kind, at least nobody does except
the architect who works with the T square and drawing
board. The ordinary person does not care anything about
rectangles. They do not make life, and the room that is
not rectangular may be just exactly as good a room to live
in as any other. So that the rectangular lot is not an
absolute sine qua non.

On the other hand the lot that is slightly irregular in
shape gives the architect all sorts of splendid opportunities
for imagination.

When the lots are laid out and considered in connection
with the laying out of streets not necessarily rectangular
and not necessarily diagonal and not necessarily curving,
but perhaps a little of all, adapted to the conditions, the
lots will be necessarily irregular; and there will be neces-
sarily at certain junctions places where it is obvious that
larger areas shall be set aside for parks or playgrounds or
general purposes of pleasure, and those will be the distinc-
tive characteristics in the plan. And lots that are facing
on those public open spaces will be distinctive and will be
different from the lots that are in the other positions and
the ordinary streets. It suggests all the innumerable
things that can be done in the gradual growth of the city
plan. As you come out into the suburbs you have the
opportunities for the garden, for the man or the woman
who cares for flowers, or for the kitchen garden, if they
care to grow vegetables, or for the playground, if they have
a large family of children. It is the architect's work to see
that each owner shall get all that is possible from his land.

All these things add character and interest and distinc-
tion as well to a place, and they all to my mind form a part
of the common sense idea of city planning.

Then comes the question of restrictions, and one is often
led to question why it is that we insist on uniform restric-

[15]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tions on our streets. You know perfectly well that if a
single individual had a good sized block to develop, and he
were going to build every house on that block, he would
never for a moment dream of setting his houses all ten
feet back from the street and having them all in a straight
row. It would be perfectly absurd if he had a chance to
do differently. He would set them backward and forward
so that, instead of having four corners on his large square
lot, he might have sixteen or more that would be corner
houses ; and he would set his houses back and forward and
give individuality and interest to every single house, and
besides that to the whole block.

So that this question of restrictions is one question which
must be governed by common sense, and my own feeling is,
if it were possible to put that kind of thing into the hands
of one man who had the power and sense to set his restric-
tions case by case to fit the individual conditions of the
place in the city, that we would get infinitely better results.
The trouble about our restrictions is that they are made
in a broad, general way and then we find that they do
not fit.

We had a restriction in the city of Boston that there
should not be a saloon within 200 feet of a schoolhouse
on the same street. Why? Because the drunken people
coming out from a saloon would shock the children — chil-
dren who lived on the street most of their time and who
went backward and forward to their homes — all on the
supposition that they lived in the school the whole time of
their lives. Of course they did nothing of the kind. More-
over the restriction said " On the same street." The
saloon might be around the corner 50 feet away instead of
200 as long as it was around the corner and not on the
same street. Just one of those foolish restrictions put on,
with perhaps an idea behind it, and carried through with
an " Hurrah, boys " as being a splendid thing for tem-
perance and really having no sense behind it whatsoever.
Once when I was managing the schools in the city of Bos-

[16]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ton, and we wanted to open an extra door to a school that
was on the corner, we found that if we did it we would put
three saloons out of business and take their licenses away.

Restrictions as to where you can locate a stable, another
foolish sort of a thing, depend upon what kind of a stable
it is and the way in which it is kept. London never thinks
of things of that kind. Some of the very best districts of
London have what they call their mews in behind, very
much like our back alleys. They run between blocks, and
on those back alleys or mews you will find private stables,
public stables, locksmiths and plumbers and all sorts of
people that you want every day and like to have near by.
They do not hurt the property in the slightest. They help
it, if they are properly managed.

So the restriction question ought to be managed in the
spirit of understanding and common sense, and we ought
to be very, very careful as to how we put general and sweep-
ing restrictions on property.

Now the other point that I wanted to touch upon was
the absolute necessity for continuity, a thing that is utterly
disregarded. We never can count from administration to
administration on any continuity of effort or thought. A
thing is carefully planned by one body of men, and its suc-
cessors very carefully go to work and see to what extent
they can undo everything that has the horrid taint of the
predecessor in office. That is a curse to our communities
and it is a curse to this country.

Four or five years ago the government at Washington
undertook what was looked upon at that time as the most
important architectural thing that had been undertaken
in Washington since the building of the capitol. It was
the building of three great governmental buildings that
were intended to form an impressive and magnificent ar-
chitectural group — the Department of Justice, of Labor
and Commerce and of State. The Secretary of the Treas-
ury immediately decided that it was a subject for a competi-
tion. Without paying the slightest attention to precedent,

[17]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

without attempting to find out how such things were
done, without consulting even with the trained force that
he had at his own right hand, he determined immediately
upon the character of the competition. And as it was a
very important competition, instead of saying: "We will
select only the very best men in the country to come into
this competition," he said : " It is very important ; we must
have a great many men in it."

So he invited 60 men to compete, 20 each, for each
building. That was the first mistake made, simply because
he did n't care to find out what was the best way to do,
and the competition was held. Those three buildings were
all to be contiguous. It was essential that they should be
three buildings in one, that is, should form a group. But
there were three separate sets of competitions. Of course
it happened that in all the great centers three architects
would find that they had been invited on each one of the
three groups. Those men we will say, being friends, got
together and said : " We are not competing with each
other. Let us work together and see that our three plans
that go in are at least harmonious."

When the Secretary of the Treasury heard of this, he
said : " We must stop this thing. This is outrageous. We
must arrange the juries so that no consideration whatso-
ever shall be given to the fact that three of the plans of
the three different buildings may possibly harmonize. We
will have three independent juries"; and the three inde-
pendent juries were instructed with the utmost care that
they must have no communication with each other while
they were in Washington. They must not talk to each
other or see each other or say anything whatsoever about
the plans that they had seen, lest perchance they should
select designs that harmonized.

The competition was awarded for those three great
buildings, and the government pledged itself, so far as it
could, that the three men who had honestly won that com-
petition, and who had been told in the program that the

[18]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

winners would be the architects, should be so appointed to
carry out the work. That was the only remuneration they
received ; there was no money payment to any of the com-
petitors. The Secretary of the Treasury drew up and
signed the strongest contract he could with those com-
petitors, but before he could carry out anything he went
out of office, and a new manager came in who knew not
Joseph, and he had entirely different ideas as to the way
in which government architecture should be run. His feel-
ing was that architects were a perfectly unnecessary evil.
We all know they are a necessary evil, but he felt that they
were an entirely unnecessary evil and the Department could
run this thing themselves perfectly well. He introduced a
bill in Congress last winter which distinctly gave the per-
mission to have a competition all over again for the build-
ing of the Department of Justice. Now a competition al-
ready had been held by the government, an award by
the government and a contract made by the government.
He said, and I dare say quite rightly, the government has
no legal authority to promise that the winner would do
that building, because Congress had not yet made an ap-
propriation for the building, and therefore it could not
be agreed with the man who won that competition that
he should carry it out. When the matter came up in
the Senate, it was defeated, and it was defeated simply
and solely on the ground of its being an act of ill faith on
the part of the government — particularly appropriate
for the Department of Justice.

Now that lack of continuity is at the root of nearly all
of the trouble that we have in the building of our towns.
It is the one thing that makes it difficult for us to carry
out any scheme. The moment that it is laid out, and
seems in a fair way to get established, some other author-
ity steps in and then you have all your work to do over
again. Even in the city of Washington, with that splendid
plan, it has been nothing but fight, fight, fight from start
up to now so that it shall not be upset; not that it shall

[19]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

be carried out absolutely as it was laid out, but that it shall
not be absolutely disregarded and something built that is
going permanently to injure it. And continuity is the
thing that we must fight for if we are going to get any
practical results out of our city planning.

We have talked and talked about city planning for years,
and we have come to a point where I do believe we are within
reasonable sight of actual accomplishment. And if that
is so, I believe in my heart that we have got to make some
fundamental change that shall insure continuity in the
work that we undertake. I feel quite confident with the
body of men and women here tonight, and what they rep-
resent throughout the country, that this organization will
be able to accomplish it.

[20]

THE CITY PLAN OF DETROIT

Edward H. Bennett
Consultant in City Planning, Chicago

Although I think I agree in the main with what has
been said, on the one hand, with regard to the engineering
necessities involved in city planning and, on the other,
of the necessity for common sense controlling the study
of the same subject, it is fair to say that I believe that
these considerations affect the program of our needs with
regard to a city plan; but into this question there enters
another very important consideration, and that is the
question of composition or design of a city plan, the
interpretation of these needs and the welding together
in a comprehensive manner of all the factors involved, so
that a plan may be a vital living entity.

The plan of the city of Paris, if placed on the screen
tonight beside the plan of any of the large cities of this
country today, would indicate exactly what I mean.
There is realized therein such a general relation in the
parts of the city that its expression becomes a composi-
tion. There are dominant notes in this composition.
The Place de la Concorde takes its place virtually in the
center of the composition; it could hardly be anywhere
else. The Place de PEtoile is the dominant note at the
west end balanced by the Place de la Nation at the other
end. The practical requirements are all met, but there
is that evidence of actual sense of design in the plan that
is perhaps instinctive in the Latin race.

My address will be illustrated by lantern slides. I had
hoped to use large diagrams, but I find that they will not

[21]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

be visible and must beg the indulgence of the audience in
an effort to coordinate my notes with the slides.

My subject is the city plan of Detroit. It will be well,
however, to say a little on the subject of the original plan
of Detroit known as the Governor and Judges Plan of
1805. This first slide has been made from the original
document in the archives at Washington. It consists of
a series of compositions of streets radiating from various
centers placed at no great distance one from the other.
I understand from Mr. Moore that it was the intention to
duplicate this system almost indefinitely as the city of
Detroit developed. The Governor and Judges Plan,
however, commonly so called, is that which was published
in 1831. It retains a couple of the original centers,
but is developed other than originally intended. It may
be said to be an admirable composition of city streets
in itself; it is decorative in quality; its scope, however, is
limited. Many of its lines today have been stamped out,
and it is unfortunate that it was not retained in its en-
tirety and developed with understanding of the growing
needs of the community. Such a development was essen-
tial, as even this plan of 1831 provides for only a very
limited extension and with its composition of many
radials converging from the river front at the Circus is
fundamentally wrong, unless complemented by even more
radials from the same point or thereabouts toward the
country.

It had been better if the plan had been turned about,
allowing the main arteries to fan outward. Even so good
avenues of communication with the river front should have
been maintained. The plan of 1853 indicates the in-
corporation in the street plan of the three great radials
Michigan, Grand River, Gratiot and the extension of
Woodward, Fort and Jefferson, originally highways and
transportation routes.

The great radials are, however, poorly connected with
the center of the city, and as they lie are insufficient for the

[22]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

general circulation and expansion of the city. One great
fault of the plan of 1831 was its lack of provision for exten-
sion. Another was that of the lack of recognition of the
necessity of dominant direction in its main streets. Fore-
knowledge alone of the necessities of a modern city would
have prevented mistakes, and the growth of Detroit has
been of such a rapid nature that such foreknowledge was
hardly to be expected.

Again, centers of distribution of freight and their re-
lation to the business district could hardly be forecast,
also centers of circulation and their connections. Such
matters, however, must be fully considered in a modern
city plan.

As a result the nucleus of congestion, through which
traffic passes with difficulty, so common in the average
modern city, has been allowed to grow in Detroit. No
provision lias been made with the definite purpose of
passing traffic around this center. Fortunately, how-
ever, the center was located at some distance back from the
water front, and thus there is left a means for creating a
reasonable circulation around it and of emphasizing and
developing a general dominant direction of business streets
in the system. This direction is east and west, or west-
east, paralleling for a way at least the Detroit River and
fanning out on each side of the center.

In spite of the criticisms that may be made of this plan,
one cannot look without distress on its mutilation and on
the waste of opportunities afforded by it for more com-
prehensive treatment, and also for the waste of oppor-
tunity in the effects offered by its streets for street archi-
tecture of an exceptional character. It is true that the
question here enters of control with regard to the design
of the architecture.

Economics not only can be disregarded in this matter,
but must control. Nevertheless it is not impossible that
the two should go hand in hand. The Campus Martius
is a striking example of a wasted opportunity. The City

[23]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Hall and County Building bear no relation one to the
other, and in spite of the unusual opportunities offered
by the broad spaces, or perhaps more especially by reason
of these broad spaces so fully revealing the irregular con-
ditions, chaos reigns. The lines of the Campus which
might lead to the County Building not only lead no-
where, but in themselves are a jumble of irregular archi-
tectural outlines. The City Hall, a low building of
formal character, although reasonably well placed on the
Campus, no longer controls it; its boundaries on the con-
trary extend to the great facades of the tall buildings
growing up around it, again without regularity or general
design.

Again, the Grand Circle or Circus presents a superb
opportunity, and until the tall buildings intruded on its
outline presented an appearance of real beauty. The
architecture, for the most part of moderate height and
simple outline, was dominated by the outlines of the mag-
nificent trees on the Circus.

While it is true that the lower buildings around such a
Plaza are more beautiful, the exclusion of the tall build-
ings from the Circus is not possible under economic con-
ditions at least ; however, a cornice height should be estab-
lished and certain points, such as those bordering Wood-
ward Avenue, should be emphasized as dominants in the
general composition of the Plaza. So much could be
brought about by control without any sacrifice on the part
of business, or perhaps it might be achieved by the prop-
erty owners themselves once the opportunity has been real-
ized of massing the general effects of the individual
buildings.

The plan of Detroit was prepared under the auspices of
the City Plan and Improvement Commission in 1912 and is
a general plan. It might almost be called a preliminary
plan and has not been studied in detail nor have the draw-
ings necessary to the explanation or illustration of the
project been made. The plan is what might be called

[24]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

rough hewn and should in my judgment receive the neces-
sary polishing.

The result of further study would be largely that of
the development of details, but it is possible that it might
involve a radical change of even an important element.

From early days the physical characteristics of Detroit
have been shaped by its transportation facilities. The
center of the city, which occupies today practically the
same place that it occupied a hundred years ago, lies at the
focus of the main street arteries. These street arteries
have grown out of the old highways and overland trans-
portation routes. At first close to the Detroit River was
the main continental east and west traffic route; it was
later reenforced in its position by the railroads coming
in from the east and west along the river bank. At one
time these roads coming in to the Campus Martius
threatened, had they been perpetuated, either to force the
business center into some other location or else to create
a throttling condition on the business heart. One of these
roads came down Michigan Street and the other down
Gratiot Avenue to the Campus Martius. Had they stayed
there they would have changed completely the physical
aspect of Detroit.

In 1853 this business center extended along Woodward
Avenue and south from Jefferson Avenue and a short dis-
tance eastward on this street.

In 1855 the business district centered around the Cam-
pus Martius, extending a short way up Woodward Ave-
nue as far as the circle, a considerable distance out along
Michigan Avenue, a short distance along Grand River,
Gratiot and Jefferson.

In 1905 the city had grown uniformly in every direction.
On the west the limits were Artillery Avenue, on the north
Euclid and on the east Van Dyke Avenue. The business
center had become more intense around the Campus Mar-
tius. Industries were beginning to start along the rail-
roads near the center, along the belt line in the northern

[25]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

part of the city, along the shore east of the city and along
the railroads which run to the west. Business extended
in a continuous line along Michigan, Grand River and
Gratiot, but only a short distance along Woodward.

It is curious to note the beginning about this time of
the deterioration of Woodward Avenue property for resi-
dential purposes. It is also interesting to note that in-
dustry is beginning at this period to attack the east side
of the business district in the neighborhood of the Court
House.

In 1911 there appears the first of the heavy industry
along the river bank west of the city, in the neighborhood
of the River Rouge. The belt line has become more or
less lined with industry and the district lying away to the
east of the city and of Belle Isle on the Detroit Terminal
Railroad has been attacked by industry^ and it should be
noted here that Detroit has reached a point where the use
of its territory from now on will be determined by the
presence or absence of a railroad in a given locality.

In general the street system of Detroit may be called
rectangular, surrounding the area covered in the 1831
plan, which had its inspiration in the plan of Washington
by L'Enfant and which covers only the present business
area; the further planning of the street system has been
governed by the direction of the old property lines dating
back to the French occupation of Canada.

There are six main arteries which radiate from this
central section. The streets which run at right angles to
the river and parallel to what may be considered the
strongest of these radials, Woodward Avenue, are, except
for the portions where they are interrupted by railroad
properties, in general good and ample in number, although
rather scanty in width. They are in every case laid out at
right angles to the river parallel to the old French land
lines. The streets which intersect these at right angles
have no continuity, no order and give the basis for strong
criticism of the Detroit street system, for without these

[26]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the rest of the system, no matter how well designed, loses
tremendously in strength. It might be noted here that no
effort is being made at the present time to control the
platting of the new subdivisions which from time to time
are added to the city.

The plan of Detroit recognizes the facts already brought
out and aims (a) to develop the radial system outward,
(6) to improve the communication with the river front
and (c) to provide good connections between the central
city and these main thoroughfares both radial and rec-
tangular, also in so far as possible with the minor streets.
Many alternatives were tried out, but the recommendation
was to provide a circuit of the most economic nature on
the fringe of the central district and the outlying
development.

It is a fact shown by the recorded plans that the mass of
business has been throttled as to general expansion and it
has run out along the radials in an excessive degree. It
is believed that the street changes proposed would render
more flexible the entire downtown circulation and allow
free expansion of business. The plan strongly supple-
ments Woodward Avenue with laterals.

Improved east and west main arteries are also recom-
mended, connections between points of vital interest and
further circuits to care for circulation at a future date.

The study is carried out into the surrounding territory
and a complete plan of main arteries laid down over an
area suitable for the accommodation of a large population.
The plan includes a study of transportation, parks and
playgrounds and a special development of the Detroit
River front.

The street system of Detroit has been studied in its re-
lation to accessibility from the business district to the
outlying sections, from the point of view of direct east
and west crosstown movement from the southwest to north-
east and from the northwest to southeast. It has been
studied from the point of view of the loosening up of the

[27]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

traffic congestion in the central district and for the passing
around the central district of as much travel as possible,
both at the present time and in the future.

With respect to accessibility into the central area from
all parts of the city the following statements may be
made:

1. That Woodward Avenue and Gratiot Avenue are
carrying far too much travel for their size. Each of them
requires relieving arteries.

2. That the means of access to the center of the city are
freer than is the movement in the center itself, so that the
first consideration should be the relief of the downtown
district.

3. That Jefferson Avenue together with Fort Street
will undoubtedly become, as time goes on, very heavily
traveled streets.

4. That the presence of railroads to the west of the city
has had the effect of shutting out proper access to Mich-
igan Avenue and it is fortunate that Ferndale and Dykes
avenues and Parker Street form what is practically a
diagonal artery, substituting and aiding Michigan Avenue.

It should also be noted here that owing to lack of proper
later development the original plan in the center of the
city forms an obstacle to any movement across the city
for a strip along the river, varying in width from one-
fourth to one-half mile. This is emphasized by the pres-
ence on the east of a cemetery and on the west by the
presence of railroads. It is impossible for a vehicle to
pass directly across town in the area which lies between
High Street and Fort Street without winding through the
crowded and congested streets of the central business
district.

In the study of the diagonal movements across town it
was found that in the main there were no ways of travers-
ing the city in these directions except those which led
through the central district. In the sections a compara-
tively short distance from the center the paving is poor

[28]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

and the streets consequently little used. Many alternative
plans were worked out relieving each of these bad condi-
tions referred to above.

Downtown Street Traffic

It is impossible without further appropriation to go
fully into the details of the downtown street congestion.
From such information as it has been possible to gather
and from figures taken and observations made it is evi-
dent that there are few cities in the country which at rush
periods of the day have more intense and concentrated
street traffic than has Detroit. This arises from the fol-
lowing causes:

1. The nature of the street system in and around the
business district.

2. The concentration by means of diagonal arteries at
practically one point of all street traffic coming to and
leaving the business center.

3. The dead ending of the streets by the river.

4. The narrowness of the streets in the business center.

5. The improper handling of street cars. This arises
from the lack of proper routing of cars.

A glance at the tables of figures giving the number of
cars operating on the different lines and the number of
cars passing certain points in the downtown district in the
rush hours instantly shows that it is practically impossible
for either the railroad company or the police authorities
to handle more cars on the streets. It is not a question
of more cars, it is a question of the capacity of the streets
to handle them. For example, at the present time during
the rush hours certain streets intersecting Woodward Ave-
nue in the downtown sections are closed to other kinds of
traffic and special routing of vehicular traffic takes place.

It is strongly recommended that a thorough study be
given by a responsible commission to the question of this
downtown street traffic. The study of these traffic condi-

[29]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tions in Detroit would certainly result in reducing the cost
of traffic control both at this point and at others. It will
require the cooperation of the street railway companies,
of the police and other city officials. This would certainly
be a relief at other points in the city.

Street Cars

The following general criticism can be made of the
operation of street cars in Detroit:

1. The dead ending of the Woodward Avenue street cars
near the Michigan Central Station.

2. The lack of through east and west lines in the section
of the city north of High Street. At present it is easier
in a great many cases for people who want to get from
one side of the city to the other across town to come down
into the center of the city by means of diagonals and go
out, thus proceeding by means of other diagonal lines to
some point near their destination. If crosstown lines were
put in, it would have the effect, in addition to the saving
of time to many travellers, of giving a certain amount of
relief to traffic in the downtown district.

3. North and south car lines in the outlying sections
are very inadequate, and in some cases it is necessary for
people to make detours in order to accomplish a compara-
tively short journey.

4. There is possibly no city in the country which can
show an example of such intolerable downtown street car
congestion during the rush hours as Detroit. Besides the
fact that the cars themselves are jammed away beyond
their capacity there is the fact that the streets are so filled
with street cars that it would be impossible to put any
more cars on the tracks, and even the cars that are there
now require special track regulation during the rush hours.
To relieve the congestion in the cars themselves the only
solution would seem to lie in the use of more cars. This is
impossible since they could not be handled in the streets.

[30]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

The only alternative is to place most if not all cars in a
subway in the central district.

The above notes on the plan are limited to the subject
of the street system; for consideration of the other im-
portant subjects treated, attention is called to the plans
submitted.

Proposed Playground System. — This diagram shows a
scheme for the arrangement of the necessary playground
sites, together with additional playgrounds in connection
with the schools. This study is based on the study of
the necessities of the future population and the experience
of the cities in this country that are the most advanced in
the study of the needs of playground development in
metropolitan centers, including that of New York, Chi-
cago and Kansas City.

Diagram of the River Front. — This diagram is a gen-
eral indication of suggested development for the river
front of the city of Detroit. It does not contemplate in-
terfering with any of the business activities of this front,
but indicates a method by which these interests may be
benefited whilst giving the public greater access to the
shores without conflicting with these interests. It is pro-
posed that there shall be a river road running along the
front wherever possible, that this roadway shall be, when
within the center of the city, at an elevation above the
present quay and that it be connected with the main north
and south thoroughfares indicated on the plan.

Special attention is called, first, to the suggestion for
a complete system of dock development in the vicinity of
the mouth of the River Rouge, which system should be
made accessible to all the railroads by means of a belt line,
and, secondly, to the proposed treatment for the foot of
Woodward Avenue and adjacent streets. It is thought
that this scheme or a modification of it may be carried
out in cooperation with the steamboat companies owning
dock rights along the shore. This is the gateway from
the river to the heart of the city and no efforts should

[31]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

be spared to make it both convenient and attractive.
Thirdly, the development of the shore north of Belle Isle
Bridge. Here it is proposed to develop a series of lagoons
inclosed by islands in the river similar to that proposed
for the south shore of Chicago. This development may
be carried out without great expense.

This river front treatment, however, represents only a
part of the Detroit River, for which I have suggested a
general treatment from one end to the other on both sides
of the river. Its complete development will require the
cooperation of the Canadian cities bordering the river and
perhaps that of the government. But the river is one of
such great beauty and is such an asset to the population
lining its shores that no effort should be spared to develop-
ing it to its maximum utility and in its finest possible
expression.

There are also other great considerations which it has
not been possible to touch ; of these the greatest is perhaps
the provision for future expansion of the city in the out-
lying districts.

These notes are necessarily a very limited explanation
of the plan of Detroit, involving as it does almost endless
consideration of detail. I hope, however, what I have said
has given a general idea of the problems involved and
their proposed treatment.

[32]

SIX YEARS OF CITY PLANNING IN THE
UNITED STATES

Flavel Shurtleff, Esq.
Secretary of the Conference, Boston

This six years' narrative of city planning in the United
States starts with the year 1909, because it is the secre-
tary's report to the members of the National Conference
on City Planning, which held its first meeting in Washing-
ton in May, 1909, and it is in part a record of the influence
of that conference and subsequent conferences on the city
planning movement. Entirely aside from this special rea-
son, from 1909 city planning events came with such rapid-
ity that a general movement " to lay out new cities or
extend old ones to the best advantage of their population
as regards economy, health and beauty " may be said to
date from that year, and it is interesting also that in this
year the British Parliament passed the Town Planning
Act, which started a new era in town planning in Great
Britain.

The considerable body of town planning literature before
1909 gives evidence of much interest in the subject, but the
dominant note of this writing in the twenty-year period just
before the calling of the First Conference on City Planning
in the United States is esthetic. It reflects the particular
phase of planning activity which created the great munici-
pal park systems beginning with Central Park in New
York in 1850, and marked most notably by the metropolis
tan park system of Boston with its ten thousand acres, and
the Chicago and Kansas City park system. Much of the
inspiration for the activity of this period came from the
World's Fair of 1909 and the report to Congress in 1902

[33]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of the Commission of Experts appointed to draw up a plan
for the development of Washington. The influence of the
Washington report can be traced directly in the crop of
city planning reports that came out in the next few years,
in all of which the grouping of public buildings in civic
centers and the establishment of park systems received
most consideration.

Economic and Social Aspects

This esthetic note is almost absent in the papers and dis-
cussions of the First Conference on City Planning. It is
apparent from the most casual reading of the report of the
proceedings that the stress is put on planning as an eco-
nomic remedy for municipal waste and for social misery.
The call for the conference came from the New York Com-
mittee on Congestion of Population, a group of energetic
and efficient social reformers much interested in improving
housing conditions. A composite city planning program
worked out of the papers delivered would read something
like this:

1. A city plan should be preceded by a survey of the
conditions in each city, and particularly the conditions of
working and living.

2. A city plan should establish: (a) an adequate and
differentiated system of streets; (&) a properly coordi-
nated transportation system; (c) zones for industries and
zones for residences, with healthful and attractive condi-
tions in each; (d) ample recreational facilities.

It is very significant that the two planning reports which
came out in the same year of this conference, the Chicago
and Boston reports, which have been most quoted both here
and abroad, gave a great deal of attention to the economic
aspects of city planning. The Boston report, which out-
lines a plan for the improvement of the entire metropolitan
district, contains the first comprehensive study of railroads,

[34]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

terminals and docks and their relation to the city plan,
and these subjects, together with a very thorough study of
the street system of the district, occupy two hundred of
the three hundred pages of the report. The report on the
study for a civic center is contained in fifteen pages.

The same emphasis on the economic and social side of
city planning is kept in the Second Conference, which met
in Rochester in 1910, and has been so marked in all subse-
quent conferences that this year the executive committee
thought the criticism well founded that the esthetic side had
been neglected and arranged a session on civic design.

Legislation

Referring again to the First Conference, one is struck
with the remarkable accuracy with which the future of
city planning was forecasted. Hardly a phase of the recent
city planning activity but was discussed at Washington
in 1909. Then there was but one city planning commission
in the United States, at Hartford, Conn., organized the
year before, but Mr. Frederick L. Ford, a member of the
commission, speaking on " The Scope of City Planning in
the United States," said : " The work of city planning will
be undertaken by official commissions with authority to em-
ploy expert advice and funds to make investigations and
reports." And Mr. John Quincy Adams went further
and said : " A permanent city plan commission, serving
without pay and appointed in a way to remove the com-
mission from political influence, should have complete con-
trol of the future development of the city and should be
able to enforce its decisions."

Plan Commissions

City planning legislation has borne out to the full this
prophecy and these recommendations. In 1909 came the
Wisconsin act and the Chicago ordinance, and in the next
year Detroit by ordinance and Baltimore by legislative act

[35]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

created plan commissions with power to employ experts
and make reports, but as yet the plan commission had no
real control over the city's future development.

In 1911 an act of New Jersey authorized an additional
executive department, to be known as the department of
city planning, for cities of the first class, and Pennsylvania
did the same for cities of the second class. The Pennsyl-
vania act begins to approach the goal suggested by Mr.
Adams at the Washington conference:

Sec. 2. The clerks of councils shall, upon introduction,
furnish to the City Planning Commission, for its considera-
tion, a copy of all ordinances and bills relating to the loca-
tion of any 'public building of the city, and to the location,
extension, widening, enlargement, ornamentation and park-
ing of any street, boulevard, parkway, park, playground
or other public grounds, and to the vacation of any street,
or other alteration of the city plan of streets and highways,
and to the location of any bridge, tunnel or subway, or of
any surface, underground or elevated railway.

Sec. 5. All plans, plots or replots of lands laid out in
building lots, and the streets, alleys or other portions of
the same intended to be dedicated to public use, or for the
use of purchasers or owners of lots fronting thereon or ad-
jacent thereto, and located within the city limits, shall be
submitted to the City Planning Commission and approved
by it before it shall be recorded. And it shall be unlawful
to receive or record such plan in any public office unless the
same shall bear thereon, by endorsement or otherwise, the
approval of the City Planning Commission. . . .

In 1913 a plan commission act for New York and one
for third class cities in Pennsylvania were passed and the
first metropolitan plan commission was created under Penn-
sylvania legislation authorizing such a commission for the
district of Philadelphia. In the same year Massachusetts
legislation made boards mandatory in all cities and towns
over ten thousand, legislation which was influenced without

[36]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

doubt by the holding of the Fourth Conference on City
Planning at Boston in 1912. Finally, in 1914, came the
legislation which fully realizes the recommendations of the
Washington conference in giving the plan commission power
to enforce its decision. It is found in this language of the
Cleveland ordinance:

Sec. 4. Public Works. Hereafter no public building,
harbor, bridge, viaduct, street fixture or other structure
and appurtenance shall be located, constructed, erected,
removed, relocated or altered until and unless such plan,
design or location shall have been submitted to and ap-
proved by the Commission; and no such work when com-
pleted shall be accepted by the City until and unless it
shall have been approved by the Commission as provided
in Section 77 of the City Charter.

Thus the seed sown in 1909 at the Washington confer-
ence has produced in less than six years state legislation
authorizing plan commissions in Connecticut, Maryland,
Wisconsin, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Penn-
sylvania, Ohio, Nebraska and California, and under these
acts or under ordinances about one hundred plan commis-
sions have been established.

Zoning

At the First Conference, speaking on the subject of a
national constructive program for city planning, Mr. Henry
Morgenthau, now Ambassador to Turkey, said : " We can
make city plans establishing factory zones and residence
zones." Before 1909, cities doubtless could, under the
police power, segregate offensive occupations, but no at-
tempt to establish industrial and residence districts had
come to general notice. Los Angeles, in 1909, by ordinance
created industrial and residential districts, and the consti-
tutionality of this ordinance was sanctioned by the supreme
court of California in three well considered cases. At the

[37]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

City Planning Conference at Boston in 1912, zoning or dis-
tricting was made the subject of a very exhaustive paper
and the applicability of German methods to American con-
ditions was fully discussed; legislation on the subject came
the next year and certain cities in Wisconsin, Minnesota
and New York were given power to set aside districts from
which industrial occupation could be excluded. Syracuse,
Utica and possibly other cities in New York took advan-
tage of the New York act, which was, however, repealed
in the spring of this year. The other acts, we believe, are
still operative.

Excess Taking of Land

Long before 1909 it was well recognized that the chief
obstacle to accomplishment in city planning was the high
cost of the acquisition of land by the municipality. Most
cities were pretty heavily burdened financially by the neces-
sity of providing for current expenses, and serious outlay
for very necessary improvements in the street system could
usually be postponed by the argument that the extra finan-
cial burden would be too heavy. Some cities, particularly
in the Middle West, had distributed the cost of the ac-
quisition of land for park systems by assessing the cost of
them as a special assessment on benefited lands.

Searching for a way out of this difficulty, the legislature
of Massachusetts in 1903 appointed a commission to inves-
tigate the European methods of acquiring land, and partic-
ularly the taking by purchase or condemnation of more
land than was actually necessary for the physical improve-
ment, with the right to resell the excess. This commission
reported a bill, which became law in 1904, known as the
Remnant Act, in which the principle of excess taking was
first incorporated. The same principle appears in Ohio
legislation for 1904, in a Virginia act in 1906, in Connecti-
cut in 1907, Pennsylvania in 1907 and Maryland in 1908.

At the First Planning Conference the subject of excess

[38]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

condemnation was very thoroughly discussed in a brief on
its constitutionality by Andrew Wright Crawford, Esq.,
then assistant city solicitor of Philadelphia. The advan-
tage of excess condemnation in giving a municipality physi-
cal control over the land adjoining either a highway or a
park improvement was then generally admitted, but its
financial expediency and its doubtful constitutionality have
made municipalities very timid in its use. The constitu-
tional difficulty was remedied, at least in part, by an amend-
ment to the state constitution of Massachusetts in 1911,
in Wisconsin and Ohio in 1912 and in New York in 1913,
but up to the present year cities were so much in doubt as
to where they would come out financially by experimenting
with excess condemnation that there is no instance of its
use that has come to the writer's knowledge. The city of
Philadelphia purchased in excess of need under the act of
1907, but unfortunately there was no constitutional amend-
ment in Pennsylvania, and the supreme court found the
act of 1907 unconstitutional. The city of New York has
within a few weeks perfected the machinery for using the
excess condemnation law, and we should expect a test of
the principle within the next year or two.

Education

At the First Conference the suggestion was well received
that a city planning exhibit would be the most effective
method of stimulating public interest. There had been
some municipal exhibits in which city planning had been
featured, but the first exhibit of city planning which could be
described as at all comprehensive was that in Philadelphia at
the time of the Third Conference on City Planning in 1911.
The value of this kind of publicity was so apparent that
New York City organized an exhibit in 1913, much of the
material of which has been used in the excellent traveling ex-
hibit of the American City Bureau, which has been shown in
many American cities and has j ourneyed as far as Santiago.

[39]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Harvard College in 1909 recognized that if the general
public needed schooling in city planning, so did the city
planners, and established the first systematic instruction
in city planning in connection with its graduate school work
in landscape architecture. Courses have since been estab-
lished in other universities, notably in Columbia and the
University of Illinois. The Chicago Plan Commission in
1912 conceived the idea of grounding boys and girls in city
planning by the introduction of a textbook on the Chicago
plan in the common schools.

Results

There is left to consider the actual physical achievements
which can be traced to planning principles or more directly
to the recent city planning propaganda.

No complete list is attempted of the fine achievements of
cities which, like Cleveland, New York and San Francisco,
and among the smaller cities Des Moines, and Spring-
field, Mass., have constructed monumental public buildings
as a part of a civic group. Except as the grouping of
buildings makes for convenience, these achievements can
be cited chiefly as the result of the esthetic emphasis on
city planning which antedates our narrative.

The radical changes in long established street systems of
our largest cities, illustrated by the extension of Seventh
Avenue in New York, the widening of Pleasant and Avery
streets in Boston, the widening of Twelfth Street in Chi-
cago, the cutting of diagonals through the rectangular
streets of Philadelphia and Newark, have all come in the
last five years. And equally striking are the great improve-
ments in rail transportation and the establishment of new
railroad terminals in New York, Kansas City, Chicago and
Detroit in this same period.

These are some of the answers to the question at the
Washington conference, How can the street and transpor-
tation system be made to produce a more convenient city?

[40]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

But they are rather the spectacular results* of the city plan-
ning movement and, apart from making their localities more
convenient places to work in, their value is to show the fear-
ful cost of replanting and the necessity of forecasting a
city's future needs.

The less striking but more far-reaching result of recent
planning activity, and certainly the most direct contribu-
tion of the conferences on city planning, is the acceptance
in cities big and small of the planning principle, the long
look ahead in the lay out of street systems, the location of
public buildings, the establishment of parks and play-
grounds, the construction of the street surface, and in all
the other physical elements that produce the city.

The conception of the city as a unit, a strongly knit
federation of neighborhoods, is one that the Conference on
City Planning did not originate, but one that it has taken
every opportunity to make a part of city administration.
Just as the inspiration for the esthetic in city planning
came from the World's Fair and the Washington report,
so the precedent for orderly city extension is found in long
established municipal agencies which have extended the
official street plan far in advance of private development
and have insisted, so far as legally possible, on the adher-
ence to this established plan by private developers. This
practice dates from the act of the Colonial Assembly in
Pennsylvania in 1720 which authorized " surveyors and
regulators to establish streets and building lines in Phila-
delphia " and in the efficient administration of this and suc-
ceeding acts by the present Philadelphia Bureau of Sur-
veys. It is found again in the Charter of 1892 for Greater
New York, which created a bureau charged with the com-
pletion of the plan of the entire city, at least in regard to
the streets and parks, in the Boston Board of Survey Act
of 1891, in the Baltimore Topographical Bureau ordinance
of 1893, and the same principle is incorporated in all the
legislation creating city plan commissions.

[41]

THE BEST METHODS OF LAND
SUBDIVISION

John Nolen

Fellow of the American Society of Landscape Architects
Cambridge, Mass.

Only a brief word of explanation is necessary with re-
gard to the subject for the sessions this morning and this
afternoon on land subdivision. At the conclusion of the
Conference in Toronto last year the executive committee
decided that this year only a few subjects would be taken
up, practically only two or three, that more attention
would be given to each one and that more time especially
would be allowed for the informal discussion of the sub-
jects selected; the formal papers being brief, but based
upon a fairly careful investigation of the subject carried
on by a special committee during the year. Furthermore,
the idea was that these subjects would be studied not for
a single year, but for a number of years, and that we
should start out by recognizing that we were attacking a
rather big job and that we could only hope, with busy men
on the committee, to make progress during the year and
not reach a definite conclusion.

With regard to this particular subject, the best methods
of land subdivision, the instructions to the committee as
stated in the final circular sent out are broadly to gather
and digest any information likely to be of practical assist-
ance to those responsible for maintaining and improving
the quality of land subdivision plans. But the committee
decided to concentrate its efforts in the beginning upon the
study of the most fundamental question in its opinion of
the whole subject; namely, What are the best standard lot
dimensions to adopt under various typical conditions com-

[42]

STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT

Or »LOCHS BETWEEN

RE1LLEY <!AyiLLARD 5TS.

IN BRIDGEPORT CONN..

SCALC 3<y*r

■fllOUEA -LAWDSCrtPJE ARCHITECT

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

monly found in America? And the method of procedure
was to gather the data or information with regard to the
land subdivision work which had actually been done, his-
torically, we might say, in the United States, to get the
facts of these land subdivisions. And in order that the
information or conclusions might be as convincing as pos-
sible and that the elements of chance in locality should be
eliminated, a variety of cities was selected representing
large cities and small cities, old cities and relatively new
cities, cities in different sections of the country having
grown up under different controlling conditions and for
somewhat different purposes, and cities with different types
of topography.

The data which Mr. Goodrich is going to present for
the committee includes fairly definite returns from 16 of
these cities, in which local committees cooperating with the
general committee have made careful, valuable and pains-
taking studies. The results which the committee sought
were to be summarized under three general heads : the phys-
ical results, the social results, or sociological results per-
haps I should say, and the financial results.

It might be added, furthermore, that the committee was
of the opinion that in taking up this problem it was getting
at the most important single topic in city planning; im-
portant, first, because it is absolutely fundamental in city
planning and, secondly, because it is the active phase of
city planning which goes steadily on.

I think it was John Burns in one of the London meetings
who said that in England every 15 years, in other words
in less than a generation, 500,000 acres of agricultural
land were being subdivided for the purpose of industry and
residence, and the way in which these 500,000 acres were
subdivided and developed would become one of the con-
trolling factors of the civilization which occupied and used
them. The figures for the United States would be still
larger.

Mr. Goodrich has given a great deal of time to sum-

[43]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

marizing the returns which have come in, many of them
rather late, from the various local committees. It is his
opinion and the opinion of the committee that the material
in this shape can be much better appreciated in the printed
proceedings of the conference and that the presentation
by him now of the results, with Mr. Arthur A. Shurtleff's
assistance at the blackboard, and the devotion of the rest
of the time to discussion will be of very much more value
to the members of the conference than attempting to read
in detail this rather vast amount of local statistical ma-
terial. Mr. Goodrich has furthermore selected what
seemed to him the three essential topics; namely, the size
of the lots, especially with regard to depth, alleys and re-
strictions, as the subjects to concentrate attention upon.
Mr. Goodrich will now be good enough to present in-
formally the report of the committee.

[44]

REPORT OF COMMITTEE
Presented by E. P. Goodrich

Consulting Engineer, Borough of Manhattan

Lots are to be considered in their availability for resi-
dences primarily. Practically all of the plats which are
now being made by real estate owners are for residence
purposes. Naturally that is their primary ideal. It is
also the idea of the person who makes the first purchase
that he is buying a home or a place for a home in the ma-
jority of cases.

Evidences, however, exist in every city of the United
States that the plats which were originally designed for
residences are being converted into commercial use (or in-
dustrial use occasionally), more largely into stores, some-
times into factories — tenant factories ; and sometimes
they are being wiped out and large mercantile districts are
being constructed.

The city planner, therefore, either in the form of the ex-
pert or the city planning commission, must constantly keep
in mind this possibility of conversion and must see that
the real estate developer when he lays out his original plat
does not so arrange it as to make it practically impossible
of conversion to other use, except under special conditions,
such as will be discussed a little bit later and such as might
arise should the zoning idea come into force in the United
States.

Three points, therefore, must be kept in mind in any
examination: residence use of the lot, its commercial use
and its convertibility, which latter is incidental to the
transition from one to the other.

Under residence use there are again three classes to be

[45]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

considered: what may be called high class residences, in
which the lots are of indefinite extent; middle class resi-
dences, in which the plotting becomes determinate; and
plots for workingmen's houses, in which the size is of con-
siderable importance, because workingmen cannot afford
to pay for the amenities of life in the sense in which the
other classes can.

In order to bring the information most concretely be-
fore you I will first state the conclusions which have been
drawn from the data and then adduce more or less of the
supporting evidence. While it may be a little dry read-
ing, I would like to list to you the cities in which com-
mittees have cooperated to secure this information, so that
you may see the geographical location and the size of the
city:

Berkeley, Cal., a typical high class residence town, but
not large; Boston, Mass., the New England metropolis;
Bridgeport, Conn., an industrial type of relatively small
size; Brookline, Mass., again a residence type; Chicago,
the metropolis of the Middle States; Cleveland, a typical
large city on the Lakes ; Detroit, where we are today ;
Kansas City, a further Western city of some size; Louis-
ville, Ky., a typical Southern city, as nearly as could be
secured; Montreal, one of the two Canadian cities con-
sidered; New York, in which we must have some interest,
although the conditions there perhaps are not ideal from
the point of view of every other city in the United States ;
Newark, which has independent methods, an entity of its
own, although very closely following New York, as you
will see; Philadelphia, which is unique in housing condi-
tions, as you all know; Syracuse, another small sized typi-
cal Eastern city; Vancouver, a typical Northwestern city
which typifies conditions in Canada and the Northwest;
Washington, D. C, concerning which we all have the be-
lief that ideals were followed as nearly as possible in the
original layout of the city.

I have tried as far as possible to give a digest, a pure

[46]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

digest. Sometimes information has been secured from but
one or two cities, and then a conclusion has not been
drawn, unless it seems to be typical of other cities within
the acquaintance of the reporter.

The first conclusion which would seem to be evident is
that a standard lot dimension is desirable. Three or four
cities reporting suggested that desire. The dimensions
perhaps could not be absolutely definitized, but there seems
to be a tendency, as you will see from the discussion, to-
ward a lot size of about 40 feet by 100 to 120.

With regard to the subject of alleys, slightly over half
of the cities considered do have alleys, and some of those
alleys have been deliberately planned. In other cases they
have been forced upon the real estate developer because of
the shape and size of his lots and blocks, the alley being
introduced in order to make use of what otherwise would
be rear property. Alleys possess both good and bad
features. A majority of those reporting said that alleys
as they now are found in the majority of cities were a
menace. I might inject, however, that it is believed by
most city planners that they might be made a good thing.

The subject of restrictions is one which is of great im-
portance in connection with the determination of lot sizes.
These restrictions are of various kinds. They may con-
sist of a simple setback of the structure from the street
so as to procure a front yard. The size of courts in sim-
ple dwellings or tenements is important, as are the per-
centage of area of the lot, the number of buildings per
lot, and incidentally per acre, when the larger size of lot
is introduced. In the use of the building there comes in
again the subject of zoning. The value of the building
per lot is another important item. That restrictions are
necessary was very specifically pointed out by the reports
from Newark, Bridgeport, New York City, Louisville and
so forth.

As an example of an alley condition attention may be
called to the diagram representing an original block in

[47]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Washington. The plat was originally about 500 feet
square and it was laid out according to L'Enfant's idea.
As originally designed there was an alley through the
block, with a sort of an H alley into the two sides. In
order to secure the use of the land, however, the different
subdividers inserted alleys to the right of the main alley,
the cross alley at the top of what may be called the H,
another outlet with an alley to the right of the H and
several irregular prongs on the points.

The conditions in this block finally became so acute that
they merited congressional action (perhaps a unique case
in that respect), and Congress passed bills authorizing the
entire elimination of the central portion of this block and
its conversion into a playground. The particular point
to be brought out is that a block of this size, which was
developed by the use of alleys, became finally so bad (at
least in part due to the alley situation) that it was neces-
sary to wipe out a major part of the block. It would have
been better perhaps to have wiped out the whole block and
made the playground cover the whole district rather than
to make it include just the center portion, with a single
small entrance. This last comment is a parenthesis by the
way.

Another example of conditions in which the lot was
found too deep, so that its depth was detrimental, is illus-
trated in the diagram, which shows a part only of a block
in the Borough of Manhattan, New York City. This is of
1850 date approximately and shows that at that time rear
dwellings had been constructed throughout a large por-
tion of that block. Since those lots are only 100 feet in
depth (the blocks being practically standardized in New
York City at 200 feet in width by varying lengths up to
800 or 900 feet) there is an evident tendency to the con-
struction of rear buildings, unless restrictions interfere, in
lots of even this depth. In some other cities reports
show that as many as two or three dwellings are found in
a lot 150 feet deep and that lots even 70 feet deep, in many

[48]

Bleecher Street is a high class residential street.

Note unrestricted intensive use of aide
with wooden houses filling deep bacK lots
only a narrow passageway to street

studyofatyp:

FOB THE

COMMITTEE ON LAND .fc

OP THE

NATIONAL CITY PLANNING

Conditions little changed from preceeding except
tiata larger proportion of some of the lots is built
over and a few railroad tenements have crept in

gested \
■ brie*

rooms opening
i amy *rt wj roet wide.

Factories have begun to appear
t units and most ofthe depth of f
Bleecker is cnan^in^ to a busir

\L BLOCK

I DIVISION
NPEBENCE

IN. 1905

50 _«.«._ 0 50 100 150

LliTi 1 I I =i

5CALE:IIN.-30 FT.

1 1

|

ATtO RAILROAO ERECTED IN ia7».

■ rlriT CAR LINE^

i i^f igit '■-■ ' ■"■ ' ■

Street 4Ar line

ft,, deep
ig, light

several

Owing to a new law for courts, they sre largar-
.in the center than in the former types. Compane

The larger factories need the full depth of tr«

Note the different types of tenements and
the forma into which the deep.narrow lots have
forced them.

The tenement in the middle of Thompson .Street
at *Q" shows approximately the type required by
the tenement law of 1902 with its larger courts
end yard covering at least SO per cot.fr tho lot

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

cases, had rear dwellings and, in some cases, rear factories
erected upon them.

Unless, therefore, some restrictions are provided the bad
features of rear buildings must be handled by some special
means. Such is probably the first cause of the tenement
house restriction, under which the percentage of the lot
area which can be covered is definitely stated. The size
and shape of the courts are also involved, and the various
other items which are well known in tenement house laws
are invoked to prevent just such a condition as that men-
tioned.

Bad conditions followed by legal restrictions seem then
to be one of the reasons why lots have tended to be-
come smaller, down to the condition which would naturally
and normally prevent such troublesome difficulties as are
found.

A study of the lot size itself shows that three districts
in the United States seem to be pretty well differentiated.
In the New England States (as typified by Boston and
Brookline) the lots were originally from 50 to 80 feet in
width by 250 and 300 feet in depth. In Brookline they
varied from 40 to 60 by 90 to 100, sometimes running up
to 200 feet in depth. The tendency at the present time,
as indicated by the reports from Boston, shows that those
large lots were constantly subdivided until they finally be-
came only 15 to 25 feet in width, in some instances, and
only 50 to 65 feet in depth. There is indicated, however,
on the diagram accompanying the report from Boston, a
rather interesting feature in that some of these small lots
are now being again recombined through the conversion of
the property into larger plots (100 feet square and even
more) for hotels and department stores.

The conditions in New England are irregular, not well
standardized, although the diagram which has been drawn
as the result of the investigation made by Mr. Olmsted of
some 700 different plottings, involving several thousand
lots, seems to show that there is a pretty strong tendency

[49]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

to a lot width of about 40 feet and a lot depth of from 90
to 100 feet approximately.

Philadelphia is in a class by itself, as you all know. It
has developed a small lot particularly for workingmen's
dwellings, the lot being approximately 15 by 45 or 50
feet.

Baltimore follows to some extent this same lot size, but
otherwise those two cities are unique in the United States.

New York and Newark have for a hundred years and
more had a standard lot and a standard block dimension.
Last evening you heard with regard to New York the reason
for the establishment of the size of 200 feet between streets.
The plottings in Manhattan, which occurred just about
1800, began to have this standardized lot dimension, and
ever since that time a 25 foot lot in Manhattan and the
Bronx and a 20 foot lot in Brooklyn, Queens and Staten
Island has been the standard width, some exceptions of
course occurring. One hundred feet has been the stand-
ard depth almost universally. A few buildings have been
erected on lots 12% or 15 feet wide, but they are very
rare.

In the Western cities (those west of New York and Phil-
adelphia) the size seems to be considerably larger. But
the tendency seems again to be toward the same standard.
Syracuse may be cited, in which the original lots were laid
out 200 by 200. Then they were reduced to 100 by 200,
with an occasional lot 50 by 200. Reductions again were
made, so that the size has come down to about 40 by 120,
which figure is an average of 5 late real estate plottings.
That size is actually found in 5 out of 11 and is the aver-
age of all the 11. In the cities further west the size seems
to run from 50 to 100 by 150, and up to 200 in some cases.
Mr. Veiller, in a very interesting report to the Conference
at Philadelphia, cites 46 cities in which 25 have depths
more than 125 feet and 9 have depths more than 150 feet.
In Berkeley, Cal., for example, the original lot size was
50 by 160. But the owners recombined to suit themselves.

[50]

fcjli BOYL5TON ST (W0ECE.5TER. TUR.MPIICE I606J TOWNWAY 1833

Lot sold shortly «ft«r JckAf.J.on

Compil.d by F L. Olmltt<l-«o»., 1914

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

They sometimes erected rear buildings, they sometimes
divided up the property so that three persons would oc-
cupy the width of two 50 foot lots. The present lot
size in Berkeley is about 40 feet in width by various
depths.

There seems then to be a tendency toward a standard
lot dimension, as given.

The difficulties with lots which are deeper than the 100
foot standard, or even the 100 foot standard when not re-
stricted, are very well discussed by the Louisville report.
The lot area seems to be the prime factor. If a lot must
be deep, it is usually narrow, and conversely. Deep lots,
narrow lots, tend toward the use of narrow buildings.
Narrow buildings are bad from any point of view, whether
residential or for store use. Lots even 70 feet deep tend
toward rear buildings. Back dwellings, even alley homes,
are well known to be usually congested and of low qual-
ity. The committees of some cities (Cleveland and Louis-
ville and one or two others) deliberately state that,
wherever this congestion takes place, often real estate
values are depleted. This is an economic condition which
would tend against the construction of alleys, of back
dwellings, of narrow dwellings, of narrow lots or deep
lots.

It would seem, therefore, that this Conference could very
well continue the study, gathering statistics from other
cities. This is all the more true because, as far as further
physical, sociological and economic facts are concerned,
they have not been received in a measure sufficiently broad
to be able to draw any conclusions.

Discussion
Chairman Nolen:

Mr. Goodrich has given but a brief presentation, partly
with the idea that the additional things that might be said
would be better selected by questions directed to him.
This subject is not open now for discussion, but merely to

[51]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

give Mr. Goodrich an opportunity to clear any point that
is not clear or to supplement by additional information
on any point desired. If there are any questions, Mr.
Goodrich will be very glad to answer them.

Mr. H. J. Kei/laway, Boston:

I would like to ask Mr. Goodrich if in his investigation
he has found any note in regard to living conditions of
people of average means with respect to the size of the
lot. In Detroit I notice there are many individual lots.
I would like to ask if there is anything contained in the
investigation with respect to the size of the lot, that is,
with respect to the number of people that are living on it.

Mr. Goodrich:

No data was received from which information could be
deduced along that line. There was one very interesting
point, however, which is somewhat similar to that, which
might be explained, derived from Newark.

Three subdivisions, each about equally distant from the
center of the city — the " four corners " so called, the
intersection of Broad and Market streets — were examined
and information secured from atlases going back to 1870.
Of those three subdivisions one was restricted with regard
to the setback and kind of house, and certain other of the
usual real estate restrictions were imposed. The other two
were not restricted. The latter two soon tended toward
back lot dwellings and factories and depreciated in value as
far as the general usefulness was concerned. It became
the poorest kind of tenement district, occupied by for-
eigners. The relative value of that property with regard
to the city at large had much decreased. The actual valua-
tions were about stable, but the property in the vicinity in-
creased in value, so that relatively those two particular dis-
tricts decreased in value. On the other hand the restricted
plot increased more than twice as much as the average for
the whole community, showing the value of restrictions in

[52]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

that particular case upon the valuation. That, inciden-
tally, has to do with the number of people which are per-
mitted to live upon the lot and per acre. That is not an
exact answer to your question, but comes as near to it as
can be done from the data available.

Mr. Andrew Wright Crawford, Philadelphia:

Do you use the term " restrictions " in the sense only of
restrictions imposed by the developer, or do you use it as
well in the sense of restrictions imposed by a city through
local authorities?

Mr. Goodrich:

I use it to include all of those several points, the law and
the real estate restrictions both combined.

Mr. Kellaway:

Is there any data with regard to the loss in value on
city property wherein the size of lots and the character of
use to which the property is put is involved? For in-
stance, you have noticed certain districts and lots that are
occupied by a high class of dwellings. As the city grows
the people who occupied it first move further out; the
same sized lot remains, but it is occupied by a different
class of people. The real estate value goes down, and by
and by it becomes what is known as the redlight district in
many instances. The next move is business. Does the size
of the lot bear in any respect on that development?

Mr. Goodrich:

Yes. Information from Philadelphia shows very con-
clusively that certain districts in that city were affected
by such conditions as you describe. The original property
would develop in large plots 100 feet square. As the denser
population encroached upon those districts the properties
depreciated in value, literally. The houses were finally

[53]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

converted into tenements, and rear tenements and addi-
tional tenements on the same lots were constructed. And
because of this original excessive size the resubdivision was
not of a good class, so that the conditions were made worse
rather than better.

In another plot which I recall described in Philadelphia
was found one of the smallest lot sizes which was encoun-
tered anywhere, something like 14 by 40, as I recall. The
original development was an old one. Even though the
same size or a very slightly larger one has been used a
great many times since, that original small size seemed to
limit the development to a poor class of tenants, and that
property has been constantly of poor quality.

The people from Philadelphia also gave facts tending to
show that those smaller houses when new were very much
liked by the people, but as they grew old, when they became
about 20 years old, they had depreciated enough so that
the people moved out to better houses and newer houses of
exactly the same size and type; but because of their move-
ment away from that district it depreciated in value.
Three or four subdivisions are cited showing this tendency
to depreciate, possibly traceable, they think, to the small
original size of the lot.

Mr. Allen B. Pond, Chicago:

Mr. Chairman, I wish to ask Mr. Goodrich if he thinks
the depreciation of the lots spoken of is due to the size of
the lot or whether that is not universal in all types.

Mr. Goodrich:

According to my own personal opinion that is so; but I
can cite the condition in Newark in which two properties
were restricted and one was unrestricted; one increased in
value and the other did not.

Mr. Crawford:

There is a reduction in the rental value during the period
while the land value of itself is increasing. Is that a New

[54]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

York phenomena and therefore unique? Is New York so
awfully, viciously unique or has it been carried out in other
cities as well?

Mr. Goodrich:

The only data which will throw any light upon that at all
was received from Montreal, and the indications are in that
city that the figures show a marked increase of valuation
at one period; but taking everything into account as best
I could, I believe that it was demonstrated by certain lots
and blocks that there was a depreciating rental value com-
bined simultaneously with an increasing land value.

Mr. W. Templeton Johnston, San Diego:

I would like to ask Mr. Goodrich how severe the restric-
tions were in the case that he cites in Newark.

Mr. Goodrich:

I am not in a position to answer that question. The in-
dications are simply that of setback, of the size of the
building and of the original value of the building only.

Mr. Thomas Adams, Ottawa:

With reference to the case that has been cited from Mont-
real, which showed a very striking increase in land values,
is that the only case which gives information on that point?

Mr. Goodrich:

That is the only one which was at all sizable which was
clear in its indication. The Newark values, for instance,
indicate a rise on this one restricted property and no
rise on the other property. Few of the other cities gave
values which were at all susceptible of analysis.

Mr. T. S. Morris, Hamilton, Ont.:

Did I understand you to say that most of the cities, or at
least a maj ority of the cities, were in favor of alleys in their
subdivisions ?

[55]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Mr. Goodrich:

Most of the cities have alleys, either deliberately or as
a real estate subterfuge; but the majority of the reports
said the alleys were bad things as now found because of
their narrow width and the tendency to erect rear buildings
upon them, these buildings being of poor quality, and be-
cause as, in the example of Louisville particularly, they
literally depreciated the value of the real estate.

Mr. Olmsted:

Isn't it true to some extent that cities which have alleys
say they are objectionable, and the cities which have not
alleys think they may be rather good ; and in regard to the
objection which is constantly made to alleys, that they lead
to the erection of rear buildings, isn't that perhaps laying
up against the alley something for which the alley is not
strictly responsible? For instance, if you have deep lots,
the rear buildings come up (unless they are prohibited by
law), whether you have an alley or not.

Chairman Nolen:

I think before we have any additional questions I ought
to say that we should postpone the questioning for a mo-
ment, in order that we may have the reports of the local
committees, and then we will have the entire subject open
before us.

THE NEWARK REPORT

Harland Bartholomew
Secretary, City Planning Commission

With regard to one of these subdivisions that Mr. Good-
rich spoke of in Newark, I would like to say that the one
in the Italian section is the only instance of a bad alley con-
dition which we have in Newark. After the report had
been made the superintendent of buildings called my atten-
tion to the manner in which this occurred.

[56]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

The lot was approximately as originally laid out, about
300 or 350 feet wide. When the subdivision began to come,
somebody plotted an alley through the middle of that block.
We have in Newark a restriction which says that no build-
ing over one story in height shall be erected upon any
alley, so that the ambitious developer there wishing to put
more than one story buildings in the back of his 125 or 150
foot lots went down to the proper authority in the city
and quietly changed the name of that alley from Aqueduct
Alley to Aqueduct Street. He then proceeded to build some
of the worst tenements anywhere from three to five stories
high which we have in Newark.

Legislative enactments in Pennsylvania and New Jersey
have given to plan commissions authority to report on land
subdivisions in new areas and in old areas which are to be
resubdivided. That we have never before had an agency
with authority to supervise and regulate this fundamental
factor in the city structure is surprising. We must at-
tribute many of our unfortunate housing conditions and
all of our improper street arrangements to the practices
of avaricious land developers in sacrificing all other con-
siderations to that of obtaining the maximum number of
building lots in a given tract.

Although the lot units in common use cannot arbitrarily
be condemned as undesirable, or in many instances as even
unwise, there has been lack of forethought by land develop-
ers and by municipal officials in accepting almost universally
the unit which is the product of mere chance. That the
location and topography of different districts clearly de-
mand different units is obvious. While the scientific de-
termination of what are the best lot dimensions to adopt
under certain typical conditions can never do away with
many evils already existing, it is still possible to purify
the source of contamination and materially to lessen the
labor and cost of the usual cures — building code restric-
tions, tenement house laws, etc.

The problem of land subdivision is a fundamental part

[57]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of city planning work. Plan commissions in states other
than Pennsylvania and New Jersey will, no doubt, soon in-
clude this regulative power within the field of their activities.

Agencies other than plan commissions have, it is true,
exercised here and there certain perfunctory powers with
respect to land subdivision, but previous to the advent of
city and town planning there seems to have been even less
regulation of land subdivisions than of street arrangement.
The professional developer has occasionally changed his
street plan, but rarely if ever has he devised or changed his
subdivisions to suit anything other than his own particular
fancy.

Since the opinons offered are the result of study of land
subdivision in Newark, N. J., the conclusions which follow
are not necessarily applicable to other cities, as, for in-
stance, Philadelphia, where the familiar " Philadelphia
style " of house is so prevalent. However, conditions in
Newark are not exceptional.

The 25 by 100 foot lot is the accepted standard, although
no developer can give a reason for its use other than gen-
eral custom. Multiples of this subdivision appear more
frequently in the better residential sections, where the home
builder often buys two, three or four lots. Private re-
strictions in certain areas require the purchase of two or
more 25 by 100 foot units for single houses. In neigh-
borhoods with such restrictions few evils are found. It is
only after business structures and multiple dwellings have
encroached on single houses that difficulties arise. The
majority of objectionable conditions are not foreseen and
provided against. They appear after a city's rapid ex-
pansion has compelled a rearrangement of housing condi-
tions.

The problem therefore resolves itself into a question of
lot dimensions, with every possible change of conditions
in view, not only in better class residential districts, but
also in districts affording the best possible housing condi-
tions for the least rent.

[58]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Subdivisions for commercial and industrial structures
only are not here considered.

Land subdivision in a growing city is essentially a ques-
tion of housing. The first step is to fix a definite minimum,
all larger subdivisions being multiples of this minimum.

The primary object of city land subdivision is to admit
of more intensive use. Some special unit is commonly fav-
ored, not because it is especially adapted to the purpose for
which it is to be used, but because of custom. The dimen-
sions of lots should be determined only after the best dimen-
sions for the particular type of structure to be erected on
them has been agreed upon. Experience gives us the fol-
lowing arguments against the 25 by 100 foot unit.

(1) It is impossible to build upon a 25 by 100 foot plot
a dwelling (especially of the multiple type) having two
rooms abreast, or even one room and a hall, with sufficient
clearance between buildings to admit of adequate light, air
and sunshine.

(2) It is impossible to build upon a 25 by 100 foot plot a
structure which is more than two rooms deep without creat-
ing dark rooms or rooms which never receive direct sun-
light and are not well lighted for more than a few hours in
the day.

(3) A building for dwelling purposes demands a certain
fixed minimum of space, usually a given number of rooms.
On a 25 by 100 foot plot this minimum cannot be economi-
cally developed in the form of rooms of sufficient number
for an average family, arranged as to light, air and inter-
communication, to furnish fairly healthful conditions for
a family of average size. The smallest unit upon which the
results referred to can be obtained is 30 by 100 feet, and
a greater width is very desirable. For certain reasons I
venture to suggest a width of 33% feet.

The suggestion of a wider unit at once raises the ques-
tion whether such a subdivision will yield a proportionately
greater financial return than that of 25 feet. I believe it
can be shown that a structure adapted to the larger plot

[59]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

would, if carefully designed, more readily lend itself to its
intended purposes, yield increased rentals and call for no
greater investment in proportion to returns.

A builder of my acquaintance proposed to erect four
tenement houses upon a 100 by 100 foot plot. He was
persuaded to build three instead of four and is now con-
vinced that he is securing a greater return upon a smaller
investment, by reason of better accommodations, better ten-
ants and better rents than if he had carried out his original
plan.

It is quite possible that a change in the proportion of
lot dimensions still more radical than that suggested would
prove still more advantageous, and in special cases, like
that of the " Philadelphia style " house, this is undoubtedly
true. Yet to depart very far from what has for so long
been an accepted custom would tend to arouse hostility and
might be less productive of results. It is true that most
of the harm has been done, and can be undone only after the
lapse of many years; but the value of making a proper,
though tardy, start is not to be underestimated.

Ninety per cent of bad housing conditions in Newark are
found in structures built on the 25 by 100 foot unit. To
increase this unit to 33 by 100 feet will not, of course, pre-
vent all objectional development, for any change in lot di-
mensions will bring forth new evils, which must be dealt with
as they arise.

One cause of much evil is the back lot structure. The
large number of such structures has led to the advocacy
of a lot of greater width and less depth. To decrease the
lot depth means to make the block more shallow, to require
more streets and a greater area for the same number of
inhabitants.

By decreasing the area of a 33% by 100 foot lot which
may be covered by buildings and prohibiting back lot struc-
tures (barns, stables, dwellings, etc.) better results could be
reached than by working the lot of less depth.

Upon our conclusion as to proper land subdivision dimen-

[60]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

sions depends the answer to another important problem —
block dimensions. Assuming the unit of 100 foot depth it
seems wise to follow the present practice in residential dis-
tricts and make blocks of about 200 by 600 feet or 800
feet. This block unit, however, is not recommended for
business districts, since it does not make for efficiency in
traffic movement. A block 200 by 400 feet seems advisable
for business districts. By using multiples of the 33% by
100 feet unit a block dimension of 400 by 400 feet for busi-
ness districts could well be adopted. Either of these two
dimensions will suit well the demands of a business dis-
trict — accessibility and rapid distribution of vehicular and
pedestrian travel.

Studies prepared in Newark on land subdivision showed
that in two sections, equally distant from the center of the
city, land values actually stood still for 25 years, while the
normal increase for the entire city during that period was
somewhat over 200 per cent. In a third section, however,
the same distance from the center of the city, land value in-
crease was more than the average increase for the city, a
growth easily explained by the fact that more or less
stringent restrictions were enforced by private owners.
The non-increase in value in the two sections first mentioned
was apparently due to permitting a promiscuous develop-
ment, tenements, factories, stores, stables, etc., being de-
pressingly intermingled. This developmental chaos is
found in almost all cities and is due generally to the lack
of proper restrictions. While building codes, tenement
house laws and the like prohibit much that is undesirable,
only through restrictions established by private individuals
has it been possible to obtain the best conditions. Herein
seems to lie an unanswerable argument for restrictions en-
forced by the municipality or by other competent public
authority.

To establish standard dimensions for land subdivision is
perhaps an unwarranted procedure in general. The neces-
sity of restraining the activities of irresponsible land opera-

[61]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tors makes it seem desirable, however, to fix a definite mini-
mum dimension. With this exception, and it is a most im-
portant exception, there seems little reason for greatly
limiting the freedom now granted to the landscape archi-
tect and the land developer.

In the opening of large tracts adjoining a city restric-
tions should, of course, be placed on the direction and char-
acter of streets. They should meet the demands of topog-
raphy and of anticipated traffic. But this topic is not
within the field of this brief paper.

I have tried to present a few of the many facts which
must be considered in attempting to determine proper di-
mensions for land subdivision. The conclusions have been
drawn from observations of conditions which are primarily
bad, and have been presented rather with the hope that
they may arouse further discussion than with the thought
that they establish an ideal.

THE PHILADELPHIA REPORT

Joseph Johnson
Bureau of Survey, Philadelphia

Our committee has not followed the same lines as com-
mittees in other cities, for the conditions under which land
is improved and conversion occurs in Philadelphia appear
to be quite different from conditions prevailing elsewhere.
We have rather endeavored to show what are the tendencies
in Philadelphia. Our studies are selected from practically
every part of the city except the central section. Land
subdivision practices common in New England towns pre-
vail in Philadelphia to only a limited extent, and it has
seemed to us also that the New York study illustrates what
is occurring in old sections rather than what is occurring
or likely to occur in the new sections. In other words,
these plans do not illustrate what is happening or may hap-

[62]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

pen in sections now being developed, and it is these sections
that it is most necessary to regulate if proper provision is
to be made for directing land subdivision and city develop-
ment along the lines which the national conference advo-
cates. Methods of development will change very materi-
ally if zoning should become a general practice, and this
possibility should certainly be considered in connection with
any change in the practices of land subdivision.

The conversion of use of property is going on in every
growing community, but it is doubtful whether the original
subdivision of the land has very much influence upon this
conversion. If a change of activity occurs in any section
for any reason, the improvements will naturally be altered
to meet the new conditions, and this will be brought about
either by erecting a different type of structure upon the
lot as laid out or by consolidating a number of lots and
merging them into one property. This of course is con-
stantly occurring, and many instances of it could be shown
in Philadelphia, but scarcely an instance could be shown
which would be typical of what is occurring in all sections.
We might, for instance, show such radical conversions as
is represented by the Wanamaker building and the Cur-
tis Publishing Company building, each of which now occu-
pies an entire block which was originally subdivided into
much smaller lots and held by separate owners, or we might
show a block in the center of the city where certain prop-
erties have the same boundaries as they were given when
laid out by William Penn, but where adjacent properties
were resubdivided and buildings erected upon them before
the city possessed the power to regulate indiscriminate
building, as it has been able to do during the last sixty
years. Illustrations of this kind would scarcely be typical,
and while they would undoubtedly be of much general in-
terest, they would not illustrate what is occurring today,
except to a limited extent, in either the case of the Wana-
maker and Curtis buildings or the other case stated.

Our studies indicate the present tendencies of land devel-

[63]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

opment in Philadelphia, and these tendencies are in some
respects unfortunate. It has appeared to us that one of
the chief objects of this investigation should be to recom-
mend, and if possible obtain, such control as will provide
for methods of subdivision which will not only be more
economical in the subdivision of land for the original pur-
poses for which it is to be used, but will encourage better
housing, better neighborhood surroundings, larger oppor-
tunities for practical and progressive city planning, and
greater permanence and stability of urban improvements.

It has been an almost invariable custom in Philadelphia,
under our system of establishing the street system far in
advance of improvements, for the first improvement to be
of a character that lasts for a great many years ; these im-
provements are in the form of the single family row house,
the detached or semi-detached dwelling, and the single resi-
dence of a higher type which is erected in some suburban
sections ; the class first mentioned being greatly in the
maj ority.

The development of the one family house in Philadelphia
is especially interesting. In the early growth of the city
houses four stories high with deep lots were built in solid
blocks ; as the city was extended this type of dwelling gave
way to the three story one upon a smaller lot, and still later
the two story house came largely into vogue. With the
change in the type of house there was a corresponding
change in the size of the lot, the change being almost in-
variably toward shallower depths for the row houses.
Today the tendency in some sections of the city is to
erect the row house upon the shallowest lot permitted,
the law requiring that each dwelling shall have an open
space of at least 144 square feet attached to it and a front-
age of not less than 14 feet. Until 25 years ago it was the
almost invariable custom to erect the fronts of row houses
immediately upon the street line, but in more recent years
it has become the practice to erect porches in front of them.
The two story house is erected not only for the use of a

[64]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

single family, but considerable numbers are being erected
in some sections of the city, and especially in West Phila-
delphia, as two family houses, a family occupying each
story.

There is of course considerable change in some sections
of the city in the character of the occupancy of the houses
of all types. Some of the early four story houses which
were large and substantial are now used as boarding houses,
apartment houses or lodging houses, and some have been
converted to business uses without any change of lot lines,
alterations of the fronts and interiors being made to accom-
modate them to the new use. This occurs in practically
every section of the city where local business is encouraged,
and it is a matter of very frequent occurrence for even the
two story dwelling to be converted into a store by removing
the front in the lower story and substituting a store win-
dow, and there are instances where an entire block of dwell-
ings has been converted in this manner. It also occurs in
6ome instances that extensions are placed in the rear of
such dwellings and also a third story added.

One of our studies shows a section in the suburb of Ger-
mantown where the properties were originally quite large
and were occupied by large mansions. The growth of urban
improvements in the vicinity has driven out families who
originally occupied this section and the large properties
are now being subdivided and converted to the uses of the
smaller house, as indicated in the study. This form of
conversion of use is increasing in some sections of the city.

We have not gone at all into the sociological aspect of
the problem as it appears to us doubtful whether methods
of land subdivision, the shape or size of lot, or even the
character of the first permanent structure erected upon a
lot directly influenced the sociological results to any large
extent. A section of this city once occupied by its first
families is now largely occupied by the foreign element and
once handsome residences have become almost, if not quite,
slums; on the other hand some of our smallest dwellings

[65]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

are perfectly sanitary and wholesome places in which to
live. Land subdivision in itself, without proper control
of the occupancy and use of the land and without the en-
forcement of proper health and sanitary regulations, would
scarcely have any large influence in raising the physical,
intellectual or moral standards of a community; the rais-
ing of these standards is more largely dependent upon
education and training and the employment of approved
hygienic sanitary measures.

THE LOUISVILLE REPORT

J. C. Murphy
Member American Institute of Architects

The Louisville subcommittee was not able to make a
very complete report because we found the subject a little
bit larger than we anticipated. And as the report we
made is rather brief, I will read it.

The block taken for study is in the city of Louisville,
Ky., bounded on the north by Chestnut Street, south by
Magazine Street, east by Eleventh Street and west by
Twelfth Street. This portion of the city is practically
level and is laid out on the gridiron plan. The block is
420 by 420 feet on property lines, with streets 60 feet wide
on all sides. It is in the older part of the city, within
three quarters of a mile of the heart of the shopping, hotel
and amusement center. Chestnut Street is a thoroughfare
that is occupied by double track electric cars. Twelfth
Street is a minor crosstown thoroughfare occupied by a
double track car line of lesser importance. Eleventh Street
carries much freight traffic to the freight depots and fac-
tories and is preferred for trucking because of the absence
of car tracks. The lots fronting on Chestnut and Maga-
zine streets were originally 200 feet deep, abutting on what
is locally termed a blind alley, i.e., opened at one end. This
alley is 20 feet wide.

[66]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Chestnut Street was formerly a street generally occupied
by the homes of a very good class of citizens, although the
block under consideration was exceptional in that it con-
tained small, inexpensive houses. Magazine Street is not
a thoroughfare and has never been of importance.

A short distance to the northeast was formerly the center
of a colored settlement. Shortly after 1884 this settle-
ment, which was a growing one, spread out and later over-
lapped the block, driving out the whites, who abandoned
their homes to the colored element.

The first encroachment of the colored people caused the
building of cheap frame houses for that class fronting on
the alley. These are largely individual or two family
frame houses. The original houses fronting the surround-
ing streets were converted or rather used as tenements of
one or more rooms each, little alteration being made in
them.

The section is now given over entirely to colored tene-
ments and the neighborhood has reached a low order when
measured by property values.

The assessed value of the land in this block in 1884 was
at $29,921 and the buildings on it were assessed at $20,600.
In 1914 the land was assessed at $31,089 and the buildings
thereon at $30,850.

Owing to the baneful effect the settlement by colored
residents has on the market value of real estate in any sec-
tion in which they begin to come, the city of Louisville, at
the urgent request of many property owners in sections
threatened by such settlement, passed a segregation ordi-
nance. This ordinance prohibits the occupation by colored
people of dwellings in any city block in which the whites
are in a majority, at the same time prohibiting the moving
of whites into any block in which colored people are in the
majority. The purpose of the ordinance being to segregate
the colored people, it has been attached in the courts on the
ground that it discriminates against their rights as citizens.
The ordinance has been upheld in the lower courts and is

[67]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

now pending in the Kentucky court of appeals, our court
of last resort.

The building of a cheaper class of dwellings in the alleys,
such as has resulted in the block under consideration, is
quite common in Louisville, resulting in an unsanitary con-
dition of affairs that is not only prejudicial to the physical
but to the moral health of localities in which it exists.

This committee early came to the conclusion that our
present city lots are too deep. Two hundred feet is the
depth of the original city lots, but they have been made
of lesser depth in land subdivision by private owners in
later years, even to the extreme of 100 feet in a few cases.
We might say, however, that the minimum depth has been
due to physical conditions that were unsurmountable ; gen-
erally the strips of land being subdivided were too narrow
to provide deeper lots. We have seen in the block we are
studying that although the original lots were 200 feet deep
their owners cut them in two, making the lots 100 feet
deep. This is well below the average depth, but we see that
even this extreme has proven to be the more desirable, as
shown by the block in question.

As a result of the great depth of lot purchasers have
brought as few front feet as possible and there has developed
different classes of narrow, rather long houses. In nearly
all cases in Louisville we build single detached dwellings;
consequently when building a detached dwelling on a nar-
row lot you have an attenuated affair that must depend for
light and air on windows opening into narrow, more or less
dark and damp passages. Occasionally in the older por-
tions of the city you will find what is locally called " a
double " house — a house open to the front and back, but
with a blank dividing wall through the center ; such houses
therefore can get light from one side only. As this type of
house was generally built three or more rooms deep and on
narrow lots we find the troubles of the single house in more
intensified form. The inner rooms are dark and there is a
lack of air and freshness. Seldom do we find a block of

[68]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

more than two houses attached. In recent years we have
the apartment house in all styles and grades, from the con-
verted two or three story single dwelling of former times to
the large modern structure of 30 to 40 apartments.

Since the advent of the apartment and tenement house
and the general awakening as to housing conditions that
obtains throughout the land the question has been carefully
studied in Louisville and Kentucky. We now have a state
law which defines a tenement to be any house in which more
than two families reside. This law prescribes very rigid
requirements that must be met in houses of this class, and
as the law has been enforced and the architects and the pub-
lic are becoming accustomed to its requirements there is
evolving a different and much better type of small apart-
ment than that which preceded the enactment of the tene-
ment house law, when narrow lots and narrow passages ob-
tained rather than the broad open courts that result from
the newer type.

The law also prohibits the building of a tenement house
in an alley unless there is left at least 25 feet from the front
line of the tenement to the property line on the opposite side
of the alley. A single house or two family tenement may be
built on an alley of any width provided 6 feet is left between
the front of the building and the property line. As some of
our alleys are only 10 feet wide it can happen that a two
family tenement might be built within 16 feet of a building
on the opposite side of the alley.

We might add that it is almost the invariable custom in
Louisville to provide alleys in all of its city blocks varying
in width from 10 to 20 feet. Very few blocks in the older
parts of the city are without alleys and it is very difficult
to wean the people away from them. Of later years, how-
ever, the sentiment in this respect is changing, some of the
later subdivisions being without alleys. The improvement
has been noted and many of our city builders are predict-
ing the general adoption of the newer custom.

In the business portion of the city we find the same gen-

[69]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

eral objection to the narrow lot that is found in the resi-
dence section, a very deep narrow shop with congestion
at entrance and darkness at the distant rear. In order to
get any considerable frontage, which in most branches is
extremely valuable by reason of the opportunity it gives
to display goods to the public, the shopkeeper is forced
to the expedient of taking two or more lots, which leaves
unused space in the rear. This obviously is a most un-
economical method.

While we are convinced that our lots are too deep for
residence and ordinary business purposes, we are still grop-
ing for light and hope as a result of the experience collected
by the general committee to be able to adopt something
that will prove to be more satisfactory.

The shortening of lots will no doubt have a tendency to
widen them and do it without unduly increasing the cost
of the land. More streets for frontage, combined with
fewer and narrower cross or connecting streets, would en-
able the landowner to do this without a burden on the pur-
chaser and we would have districts that would more nearly
retain their value. Under present conditions where a block
has been built up we invariably find the same uninviting
passages, that have a depressing effect on property values,
as they impel the residents to abandon their undesirable
houses and move out into the newer sections. This tendency
is a great economic waste, it reduces the income of the prop-
erty owner, reduces the city's revenue from taxation and
we soon have, if not a slum, at least a most uninviting
section that is always retrogressing.

[70]

THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE REAL
ESTATE DEVELOPER

Paul A. Harsch
Vice-President E. H. Close Realty Co., Toledo

The human mind is a very peculiar thing. I have
listened with a great deal of interest to the things which
have just been said, and among other things have heard
the real estate profession classed as being avaricious.

I am proud of being a real estate man; I don't believe
that there is a class of people in the world today who have
a finer or higher responsibility placed upon them than have
the real estate men. In our rapidly growing communities
the real estate man holds a position of the utmost impor-
tance. It is true that there are in the ranks of the real
estate profession men who are admittedly avaricious, but
it is by no means true of the entire profession.

We have heard discussed the matter of 25 foot lots, the
matter of 60 foot lots and the matter of 100 foot lots. I
don't believe that we can say that the 25 foot unit is a
proper unit, nor the 50 foot, nor the 100 foot unit. We
must approach the question in a broader and a wider way.

I recall at this instant a most interesting statement which
I heard made by a noted Englishman. He said : " We must
cease to think in cities ; we must cease to think in parishes ;
we must cease to think in counties and even in nationalities.
We must think, ladies and gentlemen, in hemispheres."
Until we can think in hemispheres and then also come right
back to the practical everyday state of life and think in
25 foot lots, for instance, we will never be able to solve the
problems which we hope to solve, which we propose to solve
by just such meetings as we are attending today.

[71]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Now I have prepared a paper, and I wish to follow it as
closely as possible, because I believe that the points which
I have embodied in the paper are things which we, as real
estate people and as city planning experts, must consider
together if we are going to work out the problems which
are before us.

It may seem an anomaly to make the statement that be-
tween those who are contributing to the frightful devasta-
tion in the war-torn countries of Europe and those of us
who are gathered here today there is a striking similarity.
This is, however, the exact truth. We are both endeavoring
to destroy the existing order of things and to substitute
therefor a new condition amidst other and what we believe
better surroundings. Here the similarity ends, however.
Our methods are wholly peaceful and altruistic, theirs en-
tirely destructive.

While I am far from admitting that war is or ever can
be a good thing, as some of our ablest writers and analysts
contend, still it may be conceded that, in the centuries that
have passed with their varying degrees of civilization and
shame or glory, the condition of vast masses of people liv-
ing in congested areas has been materially modified for the
better by the fortunes of war. Cities have been partially
or totally destroyed and rebuilt along lines vitally different
and frequently far more satisfactory from the standpoint
of health, happiness and convenience.

The passing of the walled cities of medieval times pre-
sented an opportunity for the first time for those not of
the very rich class to express themselves in detached homes,
gardens and the like, but it was not until comparatively
recent times that, even in the most enlightened centers, the
art of city planning as we now understand it was widely
practiced. While war and the fear of war prevailed there
was little incentive for mankind to express itself along this
line, though as far as the correction of municipal blunders
of construction was concerned this was often done as a di-
rect result of war. If, for example, any of our larger

[72]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

American cities were threatened by invasion as was Paris
but a few months ago, and the edict went forth, as it did
there, to raze all the buildings within a radius of, say, ten
miles of the present city limits, and the future reconstruc-
tion were left to a competent commission of trained and
skilled experts, the result would be an unmixed blessing
for future generations, however heavy the price. So that
war undoubtedly has its compensating features.

We, however, are idealists and not ruthless destroyers of
an established civilization. Sometimes in moments of im-
patience we may desire the power of a Napoleon, but in the
main we are content to wage a war of education instead of
extermination, and accomplish in this more peaceful way
greater, better and more lasting good for humanity than
was even dreamed of in bygone days.

I have said that we are students of a truer idealism, and
I take it that we are here today, you men and members rep-
resenting the rapidly growing and vastly important pro-
fession of landscape architecture and we of the real estate
profession, for the purpose of determining in what way
or ways we can best cooperate to bring to this beloved land
of ours a greater blessing in the shape of improved homes
and cities, and we believe, both of us, that in this matter
we are entirely patriotic, and we are going to strive so to
combine the idealistic with the practical that at no time
shall we be charged with being either selfish or chimerical.

The desire to combine the practical and the idealistic
and thereby secure more readily and more quickly the re-
sults we both are striving to attain is, I understand, the
reason that I have been asked to discuss this subject with
you. It is that we may get each other's viewpoint and
thereby develop that closer understanding and relationship
which is essential to any real cooperation. We have rele-
gated war to the background and adopted as our slogan
" Education."

The world is rapidly growing in its appreciation of the
beautiful, the perfect and the good, and by giving to our

[73]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

communities today improved subdivisions, charming in de-
sign, perfect in detail and practical in their completeness,
we are but responding to a demand already latent in the
consciousness of the public and ready to spring into birth
when given an opportunity.

As always, when Truth and Art endeavor to express
themselves in higher form, there is found the effort to be-
little and prevent and, if possible, to destroy such expres-
sions. It is our obligation to detect and circumvent these
efforts.

The landscape architect or city planning expert is often
a " dreamer of dreams," an idealist pure and simple. On
the other hand the real estate operator is, in a great num-
ber of cases, entirely given over to the idea of making
money out of his operations, of getting his commodity
ready for the market at the least possible expense and
with the smallest delay, and often without consideration for
either his reputation or the interest and welfare of the pur-
chasers of his property or the community as a whole. In
these regards we are confronted with conditions, not theo-
ries, but conditions that can and will be rectified.

The city planning expert must learn to govern his ambi-
tions, dreams and visions, must be able to make of them an
inspiration and directing force for the molding of practical
plans for harmonious real estate development. Coinciden-
tally the greed and avarice of the get rich quick land specu-
lator must be curbed and regulated — by law if neces-
sary — and the ignorance of his well meaning but mis-
guided brother operator corrected by an educational
propaganda, to which I shall later advert.

Let us take first that horn of the dilemma presented by
the incompetent and ill equipped city planning expert.
What shall we do with him? Any real estate operation,
no matter how small, quickly runs into money. Blunders
are expensive, dangerous and at times discovered too late
to correct. One such blunder may ruin the man whose
confidence was misplaced, while the man really responsible

[74]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

for the failure simply seeks some pasture new and repeats
the offense. Experiences like this make the real estate man
wary and cause him to hestitate long and seriously before
undertaking anything other than the stereotyped develop-
ment.

It is an axiom that " Idealism that is not practical is not
ideal." If we would elevate a community by providing
for it better housing and living conditions generally, we
must first convince it that these conditions are practicable,
workable and demonstrable. As with an individual so with
a community. It must be convinced by hard, clear, well
thought out facts.

I believe that when you gentlemen as a profession can
approach every problem of the real estate man from that
standpoint and can convince him that you can save him
money, ease his burdens, make his investment more sure
and cause his name to be blessed instead of cursed in the
community, you will have solved the great problem that
confronts you. For when you have won over the real
estate fraternity, captured it " horse, foot and dragoons "
as it were, it will be but a short step to the day when the
great civic reforms you all dream of will be presented to you
for achievement. Let me repeat then that I think what we
need most, if we are to cooperate, is a better equipped lot
of men to carry out the work you profess to do.

A landscape architect, to be really great in his line, must
be more than a civil engineer who can run grades and
streets curved or straight, as the case may be. He must
be more than a planting expert, familiar with the living
things of the great outdoors. He must be more than a
mechanical expert on matters of construction. He must
be more than an artist with an eye to the beautiful in nature
and ready to take advantage of everything she has done for
him. He must be all of these, and besides he must be so
practical and everyday and commonplace in his thought
that he never forgets either the cost of what he proposes to
do or, more important, that his work must finally stand

[75]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the crucial test of " Will it sell the property at a profit? "
For if it will not do this latter, then is his labor lost and
his client's money wasted. But worse than this, the com-
munity is cursed with a mistake that it may take decades
to outgrow. Produce such men, gentlemen, and the real
estate world will follow wherever you lead and account
whatever price you charge cheap.

Second and equal in importance is the matter of public
education. The public should be more fully apprised of
the nature of the work you are planning to do. I get
almost all my knowledge of city planning activities from a
great Boston daily which has an international circulation
and which comments editorially at frequent intervals on
this interesting subject.

Why have you not secured such cooperation all over the
country? Why do you not tell the public the interesting
fact that both in New York and Illinois two of our greatest
colleges have established chairs of city planning? Why
do you not tell the public of the wrongs you are striving
to correct and that you are already working along the line
of procuring corrective legislation? Point out the bad in
realty development, the unfortunate in civic growth and
how you propose to correct these. And, gentlemen, I
assure you the public will be with you, and the real estate
man will follow you because the public will demand that he
do so.

One of two things is almost certain to be true of every
land development. Either a present or a future need has
been seen and is being supplied or anticipated, or else the
sale of questionable land allotments is being stimulated
fraudulently. It is, of course, patent to all that the opera-
tor following the first named course is the only conscientious
one. The others, and their name is legion, are the ones
who, regardless of all ethics, grasp upon some advantage of
location or of transportation and by highly colored adver-
tising frequently sell their additions in a day. What this
fellow may desire in the way of expert advice you care little.

[76]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

You beware of him as you should. But his case will stand
analysis.

Just now in Toledo there is an unusual demand for cheap
lots in outlying districts. This demand has led to the
platting of acreage property in some instances as far as ten
miles from the city. This seems beyond reason when it is
recalled that our population is still under 200,000. Lots
in these additions sell, however, as many as 336 of the 30
foot variety being sold recently near Toledo in two days'
selling. How to regulate this sort of thing and to what
extent it should be regulated are questions I am not pre-
pared to discuss at this time, but it is such questions as
these which make me approach the proposition involved in
the subject assigned to me with the greatest caution.

What are the best methods of land subdivision from the
point of view of the real estate developer? Broadly they
are those methods which will give him a maximum of prop-
erty beauty and a minimum of upkeep expense, the largest
possible number of feet of frontage and the least possible
waste. This takes us directly to the city planning expert,
and it seems to me that it is the duty and to the profit of
all practical idealists to make those of us who do not know
it realize it.

Primarily, of course, we real estate men want and must
have property that will sell. Otherwise there would soon
cease to be any real estate business. Therefore the first
question we ask is the intensely practical and, you may say,
somewhat sordid one, " Will it sell? "

A planning expert, no matter how skilled, cannot make
a poor property sell. That is, if the land selected for im-
provement is badly located with reference to its surround-
ings, or if, because of topographical conditions, it is un-
suitable for platting, or if it be inaccessible, or if the cost
of development be prohibitive, we at once conclude we are
not interested and seek for a tract where these conditions
are absent. We naturally and inevitably seek to meet what
we concede to be a coming need. If we are able to size up

[77]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the situation rightly, we have a section of land ready to
turn over to the expert for preparation to meet the need
we have foreseen by the time the need grows into a demand.

Having reached this point we must again be guided by
expediency, for the people of one locality are as different
in their likes and dislikes from those in another, in the
matter of homes, as they are in their commercial pursuits
and intellectual tastes. Until they can be educated to a
different viewpoint we must give them what they want.
Therefore the question is not what the real estate man
thinks and wants, but what the people of his community
want. Thus city planning is merely meeting this demand
in a scientific way and so relating each individual develop-
ment to the whole that the final completed city will be a
thing of beauty and a joy to every dweller therein.

It is not what you want, gentlemen, nor what we real
estate men want. It is what the public wants — a great
variety of developments, so that all tastes and all pocket-
books may be satisfied and the requirements of widely dif-
fering group units of population met. This is our task
and it is our further fine responsibility — to supply all the
varieties of development demanded by the public in a way
that will insure the public full value and the community an
asset for the future. In simpler language, we can sell
cheap lots or costly ones, but they must all be inherently
good ones.

City planning is a quest for the beautiful. Where-
fore, if we educate our public to an appreciation of the
beautiful in all civic development, we are leading the way
to the ultimate good. This brings me to the point at
which I started — that the whole problem before us, both
that part confronting you and that confronting us, is a
matter of education and a matter of publicity. The lat-
ter should not be a difficult task, since the publicity policy
of practically every newspaper in the land synchronizes
perfectly with this idea. Every newspaper in the land
will support the idea of public improvements when carried

[78]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

on along the line we are working, the line of civic uplift and
public benefit.

In order to prove my case from the educational stand-
point I am going to use my own home city as an illustration,
even at the risk of seeming somewhat partial. In Toledo
we are trying to foster civic love of the beautiful. We have
some broad minded, clear visioned men who have given
up much of their lives and large amounts of money to make
this possible. Their vision has already been materialized
in a most excellent system of public parks with a splendid
connecting boulevard now under construction. Probably
no city in the country patronizes its parks more liberally,
population considered, than Toledo.

We are already committed to the creation, in the near
future, of a civic center involving a half dozen city blocks,
to be given over entirely to public and quasi-public
buildings.

But the one thing, more than all else, that has done
and is doing most to create a love of the beautiful in
Toledo is our splendid art museum. This was built by
popular subscription, much of the burden being borne, how-
ever, by one public spirited citizen. The institution has
grown in popularity until the year's admissions to the build-
ing now amount to practically 90 per cent of the city's
population, an enormously greater per cent than has been
achieved by any other American center, not even excepting
cultured Boston.

I think that the influence of this exquisite building,
this wonderful temple of beauty, cannot be over-estimated.
In itself it inspires a love of the beautiful that must surely
grow into a factor not only for better civic development,
but for better moral development, a great esthetic growth,
if I may so put it. But it does even more. Through
the medium of " City Beautiful " campaigns and numer-
ous exhibitions calculated to draw people of all classes
to the museum in large numbers and to arouse their in-
terest in improving the quality of their work, the char-

[79]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

acter of their homes and the beauty of their surround-
ings, it brings the public generally into closer relations
with the beautiful, puts them on familiar terms with such
things. Because the public of Toledo looks upon this
great marble palace and the treasures it shelters as its own,
looks upon its beauties with a proprietary eye and is proud
of this beauty in the city's life, they must naturally be
inspired with a desire for such things in all their surround-
ings. We believe this spirit is one that must be inculcated
and developed if the higher ideals of the city planning en-
thusiast are ever to be realized.

This is the spirit we must inspire. It will be the big
factor in bringing success to the educational campaign you
and we alike feel must be conducted if we are to put city
planning, in its higher sense, into the everyday life of our
nation.

I thank you very much for your attention, and while
I may not have said as much along the line of desires of
real estate men in the way of subdivision development, I
cannot help but feel that the only way we can bring out
that perfect cooperation is by working along the lines which
I have outlined.

Discussion
Mr. Lee J. Ninde, Fort Wayne:

It is somewhat difficult to pick up the trend of thought
that Mr. Harsch carried out so successfully this morning,
but his interest in the work of the city planners reminds
me of my own experience a year ago.

When I attended the Sixth Conference at Toronto, I
was young in the real estate business as well as new to the
subject of city planning. It may have been because of
my inexperience that it was new and delightful to me and
that I became quite enthusiastic over its possibilities. The
wisdom of foresight in planning our cities seemed so reason-
able to me and so much a matter of course that I thought

[80]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

that real estate dealers of longer experience than myself
would undoubtedly have taken a deep interest and would
have acquired a broad knowledge of the subject.

Two months after the Toronto Convention I attended
the convention of the National Real Estate Association at
Pittsburgh and immediately began to talk to my brother
real estate men, who had come from all parts of the United
States, about this subject of city planning. These men
who had platted and laid out subdivisions comprising thou-
sands of acres, men whose dealings had run into the mil-
lions of dollars, to my surprise took no interest whatever
in the subject of city planning. I was rapidly forced to
the conclusion that we needed widespread education along
the lines of city planning and that we real estate men had
better begin at home. The propaganda should start with
ourselves. We should find some point of contact between
ourselves and the professional city planners. Upon reflec-
tion I concluded that a point of common interest was the
subdivision and that the experience of real estate men in
sales campaigns qualified them to advise, in a practical way,
on an educational campaign in city planning. You all
know that the real estate men spend more for advertising
and are more interested in its practical results than any
other group of people who have to do with city planning.
They advertise to obtain results.

The secret of a successful propaganda, whether it is for
the marketing of a new chewing gum or for the sale of a
million dollar subdivision, is the intelligent persistence that
is put into it. The laws of publicity, of which advertising
is a part, apply as well to the establishment of city plan-
ning as a national institution, with the difference that where
the real estate operator pays thousands of dollars for space
in the newspapers, the city planning organization gets a
better space in the news columns for nothing. The city
planning report that was made at the Real Estate Conven-
tion at Pittsburgh recommended that the City Planning
Committee should become one of active importance; that

[81]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

it should actively enter the field and be not merely a com-
mittee to discuss these subjects once a year and make a
report, then forget about it for another twelve months.

The authority requested by the City Planning Commit-
tee was granted by the National Association and the com-
mittee was instructed to affiliate itself with committees
from other associations, such as the National Housing
Association, American Civic Association and this City Plan-
ning Conference.

At Mr. Harsch's suggestion our City Planning Com-
mittee met in Washington last December in attendance at
the American Civic Convention. While there, of course,
we got into a hotbed of city planning men; among them
were Mr. Nolen, Mr. Olmsted, Mr. Ford and others. The
suggestion was made there that we should have some joint
action among the various associations that were working
along the line of city planning. In other words, the idea
was that we should concentrate the interests of all the asso-
ciations which touch on city planning into a single com-
mittee that should take up a widespread educational
propaganda.

I suppose it was really up to the real estate men, as prac-
tical operators, to go ahead with this plan, but we find, in
spite of what Mr. Harsch said this morning about you city
planners, that there are among you some exceedingly prac-
tical men. Mr. Ford is one of these and seized the sugges-
tion, that was made in this meeting in Washington, to
proceed to get into correspondence with fourteen national
organizations that have more or less to do with the subject
of city planning. His efforts have been so successful in
interesting the executive officers of these organizations
that we have here at this conference representatives from
twelve national associations. They represent a membership,
as near as we can estimate, of from twenty-five to thirty
thousand members. Those various representatives will meet
on this occasion to discuss methods for instituting a cam-
paign of educational publicity.

[82]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

When we stop to think of the tremendous potential influ-
ence of the different organizations and the widespread power
of their membership and how it is possible, through them,
to reach into every city and town in the United States, we
can then realize how epochal this meeting will be if it will
bring about the direction of all that influence toward in-
telligent city planning.

Mr. Ford has arranged a meeting to take place after the
regular session this evening, at which representatives from
these organizations will talk over such a movement.

Why should we not, as Mr. Adams suggested at a break-
fast meeting this morning, undertake to get the cooperation
of one of the departments of our government, as they do
in Canada? The services of the Post Office Department
should at least be enlisted in the distribution, at the proper
times and places, of our educational literature.

The associations that are interested here have been
gathering together and marshaling their forces for a num-
ber of years. The City Planning Conference is now in its
seventh year. It has lived through its period of organiza-
tion and has grown lusty during its playtime. It has come
to its maturity, and a very early maturity at that, because
the American Banking Association for twenty-five years
met, talked, did nothing and went home. Finally they
started some practical ideas. Someone suggested that their
committees undertake the education of the public along
various lines. They came to the belated conclusion that
the great benefit from their meeting should be the ideas
and education that they could impart to their people at
home. In the Northwest the bankers are leading in the
movement for agricultural education. They are even mak-
ing miniature county fairs of their banking rooms for the
display of fruits and vegetables. They are doing this for
the indirect benefit to their fraternity that comes from
the prosperity of their community.

The National Real Estate Association has been in exist-
ence for eight years. It is now time for them to do some-

[83]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

thing, and there are several other associations that have
been in existence long enough to take an active interest. A
personal acquaintance has been created and a spread of
friendliness that can be turned to wonderful account. Is
there higher altruism than the cooperation of these asso-
ciations in the advancement of city planning? Is it not
time for us to find some practical way of utilizing this fund
of friendship, to devote it in a practical way to accomplish-
ing practical ends and making it blossom forth in a broad
work of altruism?

King G. Thompson, Columbus, Ohio:

Since in my opinion the campaign of education proposed
by this body must begin with the subdivider, I do not know
how I can better serve the purpose of this meeting than by
giving you my personal experience in attempting to apply
to my business some of the ideas of city planning. We may
work out an ideal plan of beautification for our city, but
when that plan is done we must answer many practical
questions. Do the streets serve the purposes of trade as
well or better than those existing? How can the money be
raised to make these improvements? Will it pay, etc.?
Now the subdivider must answer these questions for himself,
and upon his answer depends a large part of our city
planning.

My purpose here today is to give the point of view of
one who is in the land business for the primary purpose of
making money. I did not enter the land business some
years ago because I had any theories of city building to
work out, but merely because I thought I could make a liv-
ing at it. Secondarily I have been developing a great and
growing interest in the humanitarian side of my business.
One cannot follow this line of business long without coming
to see the tremendous importance of city planning and in-
telligent platting to the coming generations. We have suf-
fered too much from the errors of the past generation not
to be concerned over what follows us.

[84]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

In Columbus, as in most other cities of this country, the
owner of unplatted land has used his own discretion in
platting, with very little thought for surrounding prop-
erty and little consideration for future generations. It
almost seems as if the owners in the past doubted the con-
tinued growth of cities, so little preparation did they make
for the future. We have large subdivisions in Columbus
where not a single street coincides with the streets on abut-
ting property. We have had for some time laws requiring
the approval of street layout by the county commissioners
and the city engineers, also the director of public service,
and conditions have vastly improved, but the great and en-
couraging improvement has come through education. The
educational work done by the National Real Estate Asso-
ciation and this organization has been eagerly followed by
subdividers.

The public has come to appreciate the results of city
planning as never before. The real estate man must keep
pace if he is to succeed. He must give the public more
park space, wider and more direct thoroughfares and
quieter, more attractive residence streets. I have been going
through the evolution I have indicated along with the rest,
and I am quite sure that the success of subdivisions in the
future will depend more upon the landscape engineer than
the civil engineer. It is, of course, true that the plans of
any landscape engineer must be adjusted to meet local con-
ditions and the state of public opinion in a given locality,
but I consider the landscape engineer indispensable in any
large undertaking and very valuable in a small one.

It may be of interest to those of you who are subdividers
to get a resume of the results of our work in Columbus, a
city of 200,000 people. I have there in the last 12 years
subdivided some 1400 acres of land in tracts ranging from
10 to 200 acres. These subdivisions have been uniformly
successful from the usual standpoint, but I cannot be as
proud of them as I would like from the standpoint of a city
planner. Blame for this result is due to my lack of knowl-

[85]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

edge and inspiration. I simply followed in the footpath
of my predecessbrs, looking at the land as a purely com-
mercial proposition to be bought and sold at so much per
yard or foot. We have begun to see now that that view
of real estate is not the correct one and that we have an
equity in our neighbor's lot as well as in the street which
passes in front of both our homes. The subdivisions to
which I referred were laid out for the most part as a tailor
cuts his suit of clothes — to get the most out of his cloth.
This represents our error and our loss, for if I had the
same land today, I could not only make a great deal more
money out of it, but I could do the community a service
which would live long after I am dead and leave a perma-
nent imprint on my city.

It is true that in the last few years we had begun to get
more light and had begun to curve our streets, even where
the rough nature of the land did not require it, and to dedi-
cate small parks and otherwise spend money on beautifica-
tion. The results, as I look over these subdivisions to-
day, are so far from what they might have been that I
am willing to make to you a most humble confession of a
failure, in the hope that it may help others to avoid similar
errors.

Some five years ago Mr. Kelsey, Mr. Robinson, and others
were employed to work out a city plan for Columbus. Out-
side of an unsuccessful effort to vote $350,000 of bonds
for a City Hall site, nothing has been done under these
plans, and yet I believe they are firmly fastened on our city
and the educational work done through the public agitation
concerning these plans has made it impossible for any
important public improvement in the future to be
made without some reference to these plans. It is like
the sower who went forth to sow. Some of the seed has
fallen on good ground and will some day blossom into
a definite program of beautification and rearrangement of
streets.

A most noticeable effect is shown in recent subdivision

[86]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

work about Columbus. Subdividers were quick to see the
appeal which could be made to the public by applying these
plans for beautification and for the extension of main thor-
oughfares through that part of the suburbs in which they
were operating. For example, we have purchased 1000
acres lying four to five miles from the center of the city be-
tween the Scioto and Olentangy rivers, which unite near
the center of the city, a section comparatively undeveloped,
and since last August have sold $200,000 worth of lots and
have now under construction eight homes ranging in price
from $5000 to $15,000 each. I am giving these figures
concerning our own development to emphasize the fact that
planning pays. During the past six months the sale of lots
in ordinary straight street subdivisions has been very slow,
and I believe the measure of success which has come to us
would have been impossible if we had not had the inspira-
tion of the Columbus city plan and if we had not in ac-
cordance with that plan laid out a subdivision which will
afford the people of Columbus not only better access to the
city, but more beautiful drives and more park space. We
have planned out streets and thoroughfares to anticipate
the needs of future generations and we have added as much
beautification as possible, always being careful not to inter-
fere with the main purpose of streets, that of conveying
traffic.

I believe that with facts and figures I can demonstrate to
any hard-headed subdivider that beautification pays in
dollars and cents. I believe that I can go further and say
that if local conditions are met, a plan of beautification and
a scientific study of streets and thoroughfares are indis-
pensable to success. I think I would now as soon attempt
to build a house without the services of an architect as I
would lay out a subdivision without the help of a landscape
architect. When I make these statements, I realize that
they sound trite to you, but when I consider the long road
I have traveled to reach these conclusions, I know that they
are not said in vain.

[87]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Mr. Olmsted:

What I have to say is with reference to what was said
this morning by Mr. Bartholomew in discussing the lot
sizes at Newark. I wish also to talk upon the paper of
Mr. Thompson. Both of these speakers were discussing
the variations in the width of lots only, assuming a certain
fixed depth. Of course we all know that such adjustments
in width are very important in order to get the lots right
in width for given conditions. But we must not forget that
it is quite possible, if you make a mistake, to change the
lot width. Where the lots are plotted 25 by 100 the lot
width is often adjusted to meet the needs of purchasers
by splitting two lots into three, giving a 16% foot width,
or by cutting three lots into two, giving a 371/2 foot width,
or otherwise. On the other hand, when once you fix the
lot depth, you fix it for all time. If changed at all it can
only be by very difficult and usually bad expedients. So,
from the point of view of city planning, the question of lot
depths is of much more vital importance than lot widths,
the two being very closely interrelated.

Mr. Bartholomew pointed out the evils of the narrow
25 foot width, evils that we all recognize. He urged that
the lots ought to be, say, 33% feet wide instead of 25. But
he was talking about making them 33% by 100 instead of
25 by 100. That means a more costly lot, a lot upon which
it is impossible for people to live without giving up more
money for rent. What we most need to seek is a lot for
the same price which is better than the 25 by 100.

I did a little figuring after I heard Mr. Bartholomew's
paper. The total cost, which determines the price at which
lots can be profitably sold, is made up of two main elements.
One is the cost of the undeveloped vacant land. The other
is the cost of development, including street construction
and other incidentals. Assuming that the land cost 5 cents
per square foot gross, that is just over $2000 an acre, the
land cost for a 25 by 100 lot — including half the width
of a 50 foot street, or a total area of 3125 square feet —

[88]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

would be $156.25. Assuming that the improvements cost
$5 per front foot, that element of the total cost would
amount to $125 for a 25 by 100 lot, making $281.25 for
the cost of the lot. Now, if you make that lot 33% feet
wide, it means that you have increased its share in the cost
of improvements approximately in proportion to the front-
age of the lot — not exactly so, because there are other
factors, but roughly in proportion to the frontage. You
must, therefore, allow $166.66 as the cost for the improve-
ments. If the lot is to sell at the same price, its cost must
be limited to the same figure as before, $281.25. This
leaves you only $114.59 for the land. At 5 cents a foot,
that comes to 2292 square feet, and if you have the same
width of street as you had before, 50 feet, that gives you
a lot only 43% feet deep. The question is whether for the
purchaser and for the city a lot 33% feet wide and only
43% feet deep is a better proposition than a lot 25 by 100.
The above comparison is not quite fair because it is to
be assumed that in the long run a street bordered by such
very shallow lots would be less intensively used than one
bordered by deep lots. Suppose we assume a reduction
of the width of the street from 50 to 40 feet, reducing the
land occupied by the street and also cheapening the im-
provements per front foot. On that basis, figuring 40
foot streets and allowing as little as $4 a front foot for the
improvements, a lot 33% feet wide would be chargeable
with $133.33 for improvements, leaving $147.92 out of
the total cost of $281.25 to pay for land. At 5 cents per
square foot that gives 2958 square feet, including half the
width of the street, or, after deducting half the width of
the street, a lot 68% feet deep. Upon the assumptions I
have made, therefore, one could get for the same cost either
a lot 25 by 100 feet on a 50 foot street or a lot 33% feet
by 68% on a 40 foot street. I think most of us would
agree that for a detached single family residence the latter
is a better lot, although it contains about 10 per cent less
area. Even that is open to argument and a strong case

[89]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

can be made against it on the score of inadaptability to
other uses.

To sum up, for the same cost you cannot have as large
a lot if it is wide and shallow as you can if it is narrow and
deep. But a smaller wide lot, which can be produced for
the same cost, may be worth more to the occupant than a
larger narrow lot. When the public understands this to
be the case, it will pay more for the wider smaller lot and
real estate developers will be quick to supply the demand.

What we need to get at is a better basis for determining
what is the happy mean, under given conditions, between
the impossibly narrow deep lot of comparatively large area
and the impossibly shallow wide lot of comparatively small
area, since we cannot as a matter of economics give the
same area in each.

Mr. N. P. Lewis, New York:

I am very glad indeed that this subject of land subdi-
vision was put on the program. It marks a distinct ad-
vance in the usefulness of our discussion.

Land subdivision, after all, is city planning. City
planning is land subdivision. In the report of the com-
mittee, references were constantly made to standard lot
widths. These standard units, I think the committee will
admit, are selling units. While they prevail quite gener-
ally, they are by no means units for building. For instance,
in those portions of New York City where the lot unit is
20 by 100 feet, we find that builders who have three lots
will frequently divide them into four building plots, each
but 15 feet wide. If they have four lots, amounting to
80 feet, they will divide them usually into either five or six
building plots. Similarly, the man who has five lots, or
100 feet, is very apt to subdivide the plot to permit the
erection of six, seven, or even eight houses. Of course,
they are attached or block houses. The result is that while
a standard lot unit of 20 by 100 feet prevails, the house
unit is any old thing, and we find them 12%, 13%, 15, 16

[90]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

and 17 % feet in width, and relatively few of them 20 feet
wide or of the same width as the original selling unit. In
fact, there is no such thing as a standard lot for building
in most cities.

While I do not want to repeat Mr. Olmsted's argument,
I do want to briefly outline a little experimental subdivision
which I made on an area comprising approximately 25
acres of actual plotting in Brooklyn; a triangular area
bounded on two sides by streets 100 feet wide, on the third
side by a street 80 feet wide. The subdivision now existing
is the entirely conventional one prevailing in the neighbor-
hood. It is divided into blocks 200 by 700 feet in length,
streets 60 feet wide in the one direction, and 80 feet in
the other. The buildings thus far erected have been on
40 foot plots. That seems to be the type of development
expected. All of those lots are 100 feet deep. This method
of subdivision gives 204 plots, although on account of the
oblique intersection of some of the streets with the diagon-
als, some of the lots were irregular in size and shape. The
average was 4041 square feet.

The subdivision of that same area by streets 40 and 50
feet in width, — I venture to suggest those widths for the
reason that we are sure of our bounding streets of 80 or
100 feet, — will result in a considerably increased expendi-
ture for sewers, curb and sidewalk, but allowing for road-
ways of 16 and 20 feet in width, which will suffice in that
neighborhood, the area of the street pavement will be very
largely reduced, and the cost per lot, — 50 feet in width
and 60 feet in depth, of which there will be 259 as against
204 under the conventional plan, will be $478 instead of
$589. These estimates are based upon the use of asphalt
pavement. If macadam were used for the roadways the
difference in cost would be reduced from $121 to $95, but
it would still be in favor of the plan providing for the wider
and shallower lot, while this plan also provides a little
neighborhood park of half an acre.

The committee states that most of the cities reporting
expressed the belief that there should be a standard. In

[91]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

my judgment a standardized lot would be distinct misfor-
tune. A standard lot will inevitably mean a uniform depth,
with a varying frontage when it comes to building, and,
with the irregular areas which we find in any intelligently
planned city, I believe in allowing the largest latitude in
the subdivision of such areas, whether they are to be devoted
to homes or business.

Mr. Henry Wright, St. Louis:

Although appointed chairman of the committee for St.
Louis, one of the cities selected by your general committee,
I have to offer as an excuse for not having forwarded my
report the fact that we have just been having a city plan-
ning exhibit in which I have taken active part and which
has largely occupied my time during the last few months.

Previous to this time I had carefully examined the re-
ports sent out by your committee and I have listened with
interest to the discussion of the subject during the present
conference. It seems to me, without wishing to be consid-
ered critical, that almost your entire discussion of the sub-
division problem has been directed to conditions arising in
older cities, such as those principally found in the Eastern
States, and does not altogether apply to the problem as
found in the newer Western cities. The deductions seem to
be centered upon an attempt to subdivide residential prop-
erty in such a way as later to accommodate its usefulness
for business, or at least for other purposes requiring a
much more congested population than that originally in-
tended. The various examples cited in detail by some of
your committees would seem to suggest this as being of
paramount importance. However, it might be well to stop
and question whether those conditions which have arisen
over a century of changes, largely during a period of in-
adequate transportation, will necessarily be repeated in
the next century with rapid transportation and automobile
convenience. In the light of the changes which are taking
place in our cities, due to these more modern influences, it

[92]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

seems to me that the general problem is somewhat altered
so that in the future we may encounter a situation, such as
that now actually taking place in St. Louis, in which the
older sections of the city are being evacuated fully as rap-
idly, or in many cases more rapidly, than they are being
reoccupied, so that while the character of the occupants
may continually change, the tendency of congesting the
outlying portions of the city has materially diminished.

Should this premise seem reasonable, it would then seem
to be more rational to direct our main attention, not to
preparing our residential property for some future use
other than for residential purposes, but rather to study and
prepare such property for its best use and highest efficiency
for the purpose for which it is originally developed.

Perhaps this might be qualified to the extent of dividing
the city into zones; for instance, in a city such as St.
Louis — the plan of which is a huge fan radiating from the
business center — there would be first the logical business
district of two miles radius, next the probable business and
manufacturing district of perhaps three miles additional
radius, and finally the border district of three to four miles
additional radius, in which it may be well to anticipate cer-
tain business centers, but in which it would seem unneces-
sary to consider the transition of the whole district into
anything other than property suitable for living purposes.
This might seem still more convincing when we consider
that the area of the business district contains approxi-
mately five square miles, the second zone ten and the final
zone thirty-five square miles. Certainly throughout this
final zone the importance of its probable use as residential
property could be permitted to take precedence over the
uncertain possible conversion into business property, espe-
cially should our cities adopt the zone system which is be-
coming most notable in all of the later general city plans
where advanced thought is being applied. I have therefore
directed my own thought primarily upon the problem of
how best to subdivide property for the usual standard resi-

[93]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

dential conditions to be found in our own community, with
due consideration of experience elsewhere. My own activ-
ities being largely occupied in an exclusive class of sub-
division which would be of no value to this study, I trust
that I have been able to look at this problem from an un-
prejudiced viewpoint.

In St. Louis we have what will seem to most of you an
unusually generous method of subdivision; practically all
streets are 60 feet wide and the lots average 160 feet deep
with additional space of 15 feet for alleys. Even with this
generous lot depth, street spaces, including cross streets
and alleys, occupy over 25 per cent of the actual ground
area. The result of this wasteful and over-generous sub-
division has had, I believe, a direct bearing upon the char-
acter of the improvements and use of the property. The
proportion of individual residences during the recent years
is quite small and the so-called " flat " — a building con-
taining a common party wall and two individual units on
each floor — has become the rule. This would seem to be
a direct result of a high front foot cost caused partly at
least by a deep lot subdivision and excessively expensive
street improvements.

I deduced from my early examination of conditions a
theory that a reduction in both of the above elements would
result in a larger percentage of individual lot ownership,
which is certainly a thing devoutly to be desired. I have
been fortunate to find that actual conditions seem to bear
out this theory in some of the more recent subdivisions, al-
though it has been difficult exactly to parallel the original
conditions. Before citing one such comparison permit me
to indulge in one other theoretical deduction, which may
seem to have a bearing more upon the plan of the city
as a whole rather than the individual lot subdivision, but
which, nevertheless, will affect the individual property owner
in reducing the front foot cost; this is the actual street
arrangement. Practically all of our residential territory
has been laid out with frontage streets running toward the

[94]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

business center. This necessitates additional cross streets
in order to reach the main lines of communication. The
general practice of this has led to making all such streets
of a uniform width of 60 feet because of the possibility
that any one of these may become a main avenue of passage
for the public. The roadway of such a street cannot well
be less than 30 feet and is usually at least 36 feet wide —
much wider than is required for any private use — and
those owning property fronting upon any given street
which may be well paved are at once penalized for their
thriftiness by inviting a continuous stream of main traffic
by their doors. This may certainly be corrected to a large
extent by establishing the general principle that as many
streets as possible designed for private use should either
not be laid out continuous or should run at right angles
to the main line of traffic, the latter seeming to have the
greater advantage. Of course such a rule presages the
existence of sufficient main streets to accommodate the pub-
lic traffic. A roadway 26 feet wide, or in many cases no
more than 20 feet, is quite sufficient for a shorter private
thoroughfare, not only saving in cost, but increasing the
amount of space devoted to parking, which in our city is
usually only 4 to 6 feet and quite insufficient for the growth
of well developed trees. The principal advantage, however,
will be that of securing greater privacy and permanency
for residential use, and thus to counteract to some extent
the tendency toward rapid abandonment of residential dis-
tricts, which has been the chief cause of those conditions
necessitating an altered use of such property.

Permit me to follow out these theories with an actual case
in the more recent development of St. Louis, in which two
sections are taken in the same neighborhood, each contain-
ing about 90 acres and extending back 1800 feet from the
central line, which is the principal main thoroughfare of
that section. On one side the property takes in a part of
three different subdivisions, all on right angle lines with
main frontage paralleling the principal street and having

[95]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the necessary cross streets, while in the opposite subdivi-
sion the whole has been developed under a single plan in
which curvilinear streets have been used, but in which the
street arrangement is such as to eliminate a considerable
percentage of waste side frontage.

In the latter the streets having no through connection
are narrower, permitting a greater privacy, a much shal-
lower lot subdivision and a decreased cost of construction
and maintenance.

The results may be tabulated here as follows:

Left

Right

Area of tract . . ,
Number of lots
Building frontage
Side frontage . .
Average frontage .
Average depth . . ,
Cost per front foot l

90 acres

92 acres

380

370

7,600 feet

22,400 feet

8,200 feet

5,600 feet

49 feet

63 feet

165 feet

135 feet

$22

$17

While the value of such an actual example is always im-
paired by the existence of special conditions which cannot
be entirely explained, I feel that I can safely say that in
the case of the two sections above cited the external condi-
tions have been such as to give them an equal advantage
in the matter of their development, with the preference if
any in favor of the straight line subdivision. However, the
individual improvements are relatively more attractive in
the other section. As shown by the table, the resident has
in the right hand subdivision the advantage of the wider
frontage, at the same cost per lot, and this seems almost
invariably to result in at least a more attractive architec-
tural design, and in most cases the better maintenance of
the property, both public and private, than is to be found
in the opposite section.

The result of greater privacy is already being felt, the

1 Cost based upon same value of land, $2000 per acre, and assuming
aame grading cost and same price per unit for improvements.

[96]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tendency being to keep up the standard on the right hand
and to reduce it under some conditions on the left.

I feel that this is quite sufficient to establish the superior-
ity of a residential property of comparatively broad front-
age and shallow depth, with a street arrangement offering
a maximum of privacy.

Hon. Edward M. Bassett, New York:

I think that the suggestion of intermediate unopened
streets is one that has been considered in New York City,
but there at least it would have many disadvantages. One
would be that while the street was on the map and unopened,
people would build in the bed of it, even locate on it indus-
tries with large buildings, and then when the street was
opened later, the cost of purchasing and demolishing these
buildings would be assessed upon the abutting property.
It is often an invitation to builders because they know that
sooner or later the city will buy their improvements. It
is therefore very necessary in our state that there should
be an ability to preserve the bed of proposed public streets
against improvements which will have to be paid for later.

In New York City, and especially in the Borough of
Queens, there is a tendency to lay out building plots suffi-
ciently large so that the home owner can have his own auto-
mobile garage and space beside his home for access to it.
We are going to hear more of this in the next ten years
because automobiles are getting so inexpensive.

In the law office with which I am connected we make a
good many first mortgages to small builders in the Borough
of Queens, and during the last six months I have heard from
at least ten builders who usually construct houses on lots
of about 20 to 30 feet in width and 100 feet in depth. Now
they want wider lots in order to leave a space for auto-
mobiles between the houses. They tell me that if this is
not done it hurts in the selling of the house. These houses
sell for $3800 to $4500. You cannot make a building lot
much under 100 feet in depth and still provide a living

[97]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

place for a small household with the conveniences that seem
to be coming in the future, reckoning as one of these con-
veniences, the low priced automobile, which seems to be tak-
ing the place of the summer vacation for many families of
moderate means.

Mr. Thomas Adams, Ottaw, Can.:

I think that we have scarcely appreciated an important
difference between England and the American continent,
namely, the comparative scarcity and dearness of land on
this side of the Atlantic. The American system of sub-
dividing land and speculating in its building use causes
real scarcity for housing purposes in most cities. This
condition helps to create a serious obstacle to giving greater
spaciousness around buildings, to restricting heights of
buildings and to providing deeper lots. It is difficult to
see how we can standardize subdivisions since conditions
differ in different cities as well as during different periods
of time in each locality. The justification for the exist-
ence of the town planner as a professional man lies in the
fact that circumstances vary to such an extent in regard
to all these matters that every scheme of land development
for building purposes should be considered on its merits.
One of the proposals of town planners is that there should
be a zoning system for factories and residences ; the depth
of subdivisions in factory districts must be determined on
quite different principles from those which have to be fixed
in a residential district. If we have to fix a minimum, it
should not be less than 125 feet, but in residential neighbor-
hoods in the suburbs of towns it should be 150 to 200 feet.

With regard to the question of erecting buildings on the
rear parts of lots, it is obvious that that is a matter which
should be regulated by fixing the proportion of lots to be
built upon and requiring separate street access to each
building. If we did that, it would not be necessary to limit
the depths of lots as a means of preventing rear buildings
being erected. It might be that in exceptional cases the

[98]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

town planner should advise the construction of an extra
street and the use of land in rear lots for building purposes,
but except under a properly considered scheme for remod-
eling a developed area according to strict hygienic prin-
ciples, there should be a bar against building on rear lots.
The proportion of a lot to be built upon should be deter-
mined and rigidly adhered to in general cases.

In considering the British schemes to which one speaker
has made reference, it has to be remembered that one
of the aims of the promoters of the garden villages of
England is to secure greater spaciousness around the
homes of the people without extra cost for development
being incurred. In other words, the cost of constructing
local improvements is sought to be reduced by these schemes
sufficiently to cover the extra cost of the larger area of
land given to each house. That is a matter of laying out
the land on intelligent principles and not allowing it to
be developed on hard and fast rules. We have to adjust
our schemes to economic conditions and accomplish the best
possible results amidst circumstances which can never be
ideal. We have also to adjust differences between those
who represent public and those who possess private inter-
ests. These are matters which can never be satisfactorily
governed by general by-law. They require the exercise
of discretion, intelligence and skill to deal with them, and
that is precisely the reason why a town planner is so much
needed as a guide in connection with all kinds of city de-
velopment. To fix a minimum nearly always means to
create a standard, and if this conference makes a definite
recommendation on the subject of depths of subdivisions,
it is certain that the recommendation will be abused by
those who want to use it to further some schemes of an
undesirable character. The information that has been
collected will be of great value as a guide to town plan-
ners, but it will be a mistake to make definite recommenda-
tions. At any rate it seems desirable that the studies
should be continued for another year.

[99]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Mr. John Ihlder, New York:

Unlike some of our British friends, as Mr. Adams, who
can see nothing good in German city planning and housing,
I believe that we Americans can find much that is good in
English. Mr. Adams has spoken of the English practice of
limiting the number of houses per acre. I believe that a
good lead for us. But it must be remembered that in the
residence districts of many of our cities the present prac-
tice is to build a considerably smaller number of houses
per acre than the English standard — ten or twelve. As
Mr. Adams himself says, there is the danger here of per-
suading people to accept a lower standard than they other-
wise would. This, however, is a danger inherent in setting
minimum standards. So we must be sure always to state
that they are minimum and that really good building will
not come down to them. The great value of such a mini-
mum standard for the number of houses per acre is likely
to appear, not in the first platting and building, but later
when it is sought to thrust new houses among the old.

But valuable as this limitation of number of houses per
acre may prove, it must be supplemented by the American
practice of requiring a definite minimum number of feet
of open space adjacent to every wall containing openings
to light or ventilate the house. In Ruislip-Northwood,
one of the most successful English developments under
the provisions of the Housing and Town Planning, etc.,
Act of 1909, we found a group of houses on narrow, deep
lots which complied with the twelve to the acre limitation,
but which were only six feet apart. This is not adequate.

There is one further point we Americans must bear in
mind. When the English speak of twelve houses per acre,
they mean the dwellings of twelve families. A two family
house counts as two houses, a twelve family tenement — if
they had such a thing — would count as twelve houses
and so call for a whole acre to itself. Of course without
such an understanding of terms the limitation would be
meaningless — consider twelve-family houses per acre !

[100]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

To go back to lot sizes. Some of the speakers have im-
plied that there is a desire on the part of others to work
out a single lot size which shall be universally applied.
This they have vigorously condemned. But that is not
my understanding of our purpose. May we not, by be-
ginning with the size and number of rooms in houses de-
signed for tenants of varying economic status, by studying
the different types of houses, one, two and more families,
detached, semi-detached, group and row, find a basis for
certain general principles or even arrive at a fairly definite
idea of the most practical lot width and depth in an area
which is likely to undergo the usual transformations?
There should be left as much liberty as possible of course,
but the fact that we must lay out permanent streets the
distance between which will represent the combined depth
of lots fronting on the two streets makes impossible such
complete liberty as Mr. Lewis advocates. So we must
come to some conclusion as to the best lot depths at
least.

Me. Allen B. Pond, Chicago:

I was greatly interested in the remarks of Mr. Lewis.
They brought once more clearly to mind what we are all
prone to forget — the danger of generalizing on a too
slender foundation of local conditions. Mr. Lewis em-
phasized the tendency in New York to split the wider
lots into materially narrower lots, running from 13 feet
up, and gave that as a reason why it was quite unim-
portant to pay attention to the matter of lot subdivision
in laying out towns or additions to towns. In Chicago,
ouside of the central district and a few very high class
residential districts, the average lot size has for many
years been 25 feet in width and approximately 125 feet
in depth. One could almost count on one's hands the
number of instances in Chicago in which such lots or
combination of such lots had been resubdivided into the
narrower lots described by Mr. Lewis. The average small

[101]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

residential building in Chicago is either a single family
house or a two or three family house built on the 25 foot
lot, and the tendency today is to build two or three family
houses on the 25 foot lot ; and a result of this condition is
that in every attempt in recent years to revise the building
ordinances so as to give a greater width to side line courts,
which are of the utmost importance in houses more than
two rooms deep — and the Chicago buildings above re-
ferred to are three and more rooms deep — the effort has
been fought by real estate dealers, subdividers of property
and small owners on the ground that it was impossible to
use to advantage for two and three family buildings the
standard 25 foot lot with a side court as wide as all the
health experts insisted was necessary for proper hygiene.
And the result of this situation is today that the prescribed
minimum side line court is too narrow.

The more intelligent subdividers are beginning to make
30 feet and upwards their standard width, but we are still
seriously handicapped by the enormous number of 25 feet
subdivisions. I do not say that it is desirable that there
should be legislation fixing in any community the minimum
lot subdivision, either as to width or depth, but I insist
that it is highly desirable that in every community there be
established by custom if not by legislation, and that such
custom be bulwarked in strong expert opinion, a minimum
width and possibly a minimum depth. Obviously such a
restriction, whether in the form of legislation or in the
form of custom growing out of expert opinion, must differ
with the varying conditions in the different communities,
and we must not allow ourselves to lay down general prin-
ciples deduced from ultraurban conditions in one part of
the country to conditions urban and suburban in other
parts of the country, for such generalizations will be cer-
tain to do harm.

Mr. Ford rightly pointed out the bearing of the question
of the use and occupancy upon the question of lot dimen-
sions. Obviously, if a community adopts a zone system

[102]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

and differentiates areas by type of occupancy and func-
tion, the problem is enormously simplified. Until such
time as we in America undertake to differentiate areas
by occupancy and function we can perhaps avoid some
of the difficulties pointed out by Mr. Ford by abandoning
the back alley. Mr. Ford and others have made the
comment that the shallow lot does not lend itself readily
to a conversion from residential function to manufacturing
and commercial function and that a reasonable degree of
convertibility should be held in mind in making subdivisions
in city planning generally.

History in the West seems to show that public service
functions, whether operated by the city or by private cor-
poration, make more and more use of alleys. This, added
to the fact that the American has the bad habit of assum-
ing that whatever is and has been is sacred and that once
an alley always an alley, has the result of placing in the
alleys permanent conduits for public service uses, with
the result that the vacation of the alleys becomes difficult
or almost impossible. The abandonment in advance of the
alley scheme makes it possible to convert shallow resi-
dential lots contiguous at the rear into industrial and
commercial property of suitable depth by the easy process
of going through from street to street. In other words,
it is not impracticable to subdivide into lots of great width
and lesser depth — practicable from the standpoint of
shape for the building of houses and tenements two rooms
deep, and at the same time convertible into property suit-
able for business purposes by the combining of lots on
two streets in one ownership or under one lease.

Mr. E. C. Mershon, Saginaw, Mich.:

In this discussion of the best methods of land subdivision
and the recommendation as to the adoption of a minimum
standard depth and width of lot, I think it is lost sight of
that usually in the original subdivision of land the pur-
pose is to provide a lot suitable in every way to the de-

[103]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tached house. In studying the housing problem in connec-
tion with city planning, those best informed, I believe,
are a unit in the opinion that the ideal living conditions
are those provided in the detached dwelling with space
on both sides of the house, room in front of the house
for flower gardens or lawn, and room in the rear for
plenty of air space and a garden if desired.

Thus the best land subdivision would be the size of lot
usually provided in the suburb, approximately 60 feet by
120 more or less.

Those who have urged against the shallow lot and who
demand 100 feet as the minimum depth of a lot undoubtedly
have the above conditions in mind. But if any one thing
has been shown in these various conferences, it is that a
city planned originally with deep lots brings about con-
ditions such as have been illustrated time and again on the
blackboard at these conferences and by blue prints hung
on our walls ; and that the worst conditions existing in our
cities, which breed slums and disease, are those brought
about by the large block containing deep lots. Every single
instance which has been held up as a " terrible example "
has depicted such a block and illustrated the evil of the
deep lot.

The solution in my opinion is to allow, as you will have
to, the deep lot in our suburbs, but for the city to retain
the authority or to acquire the authority of replatting
the objectionable blocks, cutting down the deep lot to
one half of its original depth, making the lots from 50
to 60 feet in depth, thus leaving in the center of the block
a large airy court under public control which can be used
for playgrounds, for the parking of automobiles, for
public baths, for allotment gardens, for pubic laundries,
for the administration of so-called settlement work, in-
cluding necessary administration buildings, dispensaries,
social quarters and the thousand and one purposes for
which cheap real estate is required. Open up these courts
to the streets so that the passer-by can see that they main-

[ 104]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tain the same attractive conditions that our streets, park-
ways, playgrounds, etc., do.

Charles W. Leavitt, New York:

In all of the discussion on the subject of the subdivision
of land which has taken place at this conference there are
several points which have not been touched upon and
which, from my experience of some twenty years, during
which I have been actually engaged in land subdivision in
many parts of the United States and Canada, I have found
to be quite essential.

The first of these is the importance of existing condi-
tions, by which I mean the peculiarities of the soil, whether
it is sandy, open and well drained, such as that on Long
Island, or heavy and silty, hard to drain, such as that
found in the state of Louisiana; whether the land is subject
to smoke blown from factories or other activities in the
city ; whether it is free from the soot nuisance.

Second, the kind and the height of the buildings which
must be built on the land ; whether they are to have masonry
walls or are to be built as we find them in the tropics, with
the walls of louvers; whether they are to be ornate or
matter of fact business structures.

Third, general exposure; whether the property faces
north, south, east or west; whether it is subject to preva-
lent winds or is on the leeward side of a hill or mountain;
whether the elevation is high and exhilarating or whether
it is on the seaboard.

Fourth, the width of streets. Do the conditions warrant
wide, open streets, as one might find at Colorado Springs,
giving easy access for plenty of air and ventilation, or
must the work be done on narrow cross streets, as one finds
around Baltimore, Philadelphia and some of the environs
of New York City and Boston?

Fifth, climate. Is the subdivision to be made in Winni-
peg, Man. ; Montreal, Que. ; Toronto, Ont. ; San Francisco,
Cal. ; Duluth, Minn.; New York City; Venice, Italy; New

[105]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Orleans, La. ; Birmingham, Ala. ; Atlanta, Ga. ; Tampa,
Fla., or Kingston, Jamaica? In all of these places I have
been familiar with the problem of the subdivision of land,
and the range of climate in Manitoba, from 100° in sum-
mer to 60° below zero in winter, certainly demands a
very different layout than that in Kingston, where the
thermometer is about 90° the year round, with very high
humidity, in contrast to that of Manitoba, which has
almost none.

Sixth, local demand. We find that the American de-
mands more room than the Italian, that the French and
English want more than the German, that the working
classes are satisfied with buildings huddled together and
that the wealthy classes run to great extremes in this
particular, from small rooms in crowded hotels to enormous
country estates. The actual local demand of each particu-
lar street should be taken into consideration in planning
the lots on that street.

While standards may be fixed as to size of lots, say 20
by 80, 40 by 100, 75 by 150, 100 by 200, 200 by 400,
or what you will, in each case I think that in this, as in
other considerations, the worker must be guided in each
instance by the several points which I have mentioned
above, and standards, if they are to be fixed, must be
based on such a schedule that not only these points but
many others which have been discussed in this conference
will receive due attention. The whole matter is involved,
and it is only after years of study of many conditions
that anyone can hope to be able to acquire the knowledge
to subdivide intelligently and make the land valuable for
future as well as present use.

[106]

THE ARCHITECTURAL SIDE OF CITY
PLANNING

Frederick L. Ackerman

Member American Institute of Architects, New York City

I am requested to speak to you upon the topic : The Ar-
chitectural Side of City Planning. Now I wonder what these
terms signify to each of us. I do not know exactly what
they mean to you. I know that these terms have for each
of us a certain definite meaning which is shaded by our
experiences; and our individual conceptions range from
ideas quite similar in their nature to those approaching the
opposite in meaning. I make no attempt to define the
terms " architecture " and " city planning," nor do I ask
that you accept the interpretation which I wish to give to
them. I simply wish to surround each with a group of as-
sociate ideas so that there may be established a better un-
derstanding between us.

The term " architecture " in connection with city plan-
ning brings to the minds of most of us visions of well or-
dered cities containing elements of beauty, things monu-
mental in character, things decorative. Our group of asso-
ciated ideas is limited by our experience. We differentiate
for example between engineering and architectural con-
ceptions in a very curious way. I do not wish to quibble
over these terms. A mere definition is of no consequence.
All that I desire to express is that I shall use the term
" architecture " in a broader sense than is our custom. I
shall use it as an all inclusive term embracing both the
utilitarian and the esthetic in our physical environment.

Likewise, for a better mutual understanding, let me
surround the term " city planning " with a number of

[107]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

associate ideas. As I conceive the term, city planning is
not a series of legislative acts, as so many assume, impos-
ing upon a people a set of conditions to which their lives
must be warped into conformity ; it is not merely the carry-
ing out of certain theories developed by city planning en-
gineers, and by students of social and economic conditions
or of the ideals of the architect. It is not merely the pro-
viding for adequate transportation, proper sanitation, bet-
ter housing or more beautiful surroundings. It is more
than all of these. City planning is the act of providing a
more adequate physical expression for the composite ideals
of groups of people thrown together by social and economic
forces in our communities.

Our composite thought, our culture, is expressed in our
physical environment through many subtle forces and in-
fluences, both conscious and unconscious. City planning is
not a substitute for these forces ; it is rather a conscious
effort to transform our vague ideals of community living
into forms which will accurately express such ideals.

So much for the general meaning of the terms. I shall
not attempt here to discuss merely the esthetic side of the
subject, nor the value of such. I believe most of us have
developed beyond the point where it is first necessary that
the economic value of beauty be established before its worth
may be considered. I believe also that most of us recog-
nize in art that there is a set of values quite apart from
any measured by a monetary scale. I shall confine my
remarks to the broader phase of architectural expression
as already suggested and shall consider the causes which
have to do with the character of physical environment.

We all recognize the compound temperamental traits,
moral attitudes, artistic styles, literary values, customs,
manners, which make the various nations so strikingly dif-
ferent one from another. Through an interweaving of
sociological and physical causes too complex to unravel,
national cultures have grown up side by side upon every
continent. Some subtle influence stamps everything from

[108]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

look of town and countryside to personality of the indi-
vidual with a peculiar quality. A New England village is
a New England village. A Western town is a town with a
design and a personality of its own.

Now the expression of all the subtle, complex influences
makes itself manifest to us, to a very great degree, through
our sense of sight and the inert medium of materials. Nat-
ural conditions, such as geographical location and climate,
exert influences ; but in the main, human agencies work the
transformations and make things expressive of ideas.
When the expression is phrased in certain forms, it is called
" engineering," " architecture," " art."

The term " art " to the American mind suggests a very
limited group of associate ideas. For the great part, such
ideas relate to ages past and to other peoples. We assume
" art " as being synonomous with " beauty " — a non-
essential quality — an expression in no wise intimately
related to the conditions surrounding our bread and but-
ter existence.

The term should be interpreted in a broader sense, for
it is alone through some sort of creative impulse that every
subtle phase and variation of a people's composite nature
finds an accurate expression.

Does sculpture or painting, or do the " works of art "
or even the " monuments of architecture " or our " great
feats of engineering " completely and adequately reveal
the story of a civilization? Is it not also in the more
prosaic forms of expression that we find the story told with
equal accuracy and by the use of terms of more intimate
appeal? Our rural homes, our villages, our cities — all
that they contain, the good, the bad, the beautiful and the
ugly, tell the true story — reveal the secrets. Into the
great physical composite has been wrought, for the greater
part by the unguided hand, all of our hopes, our aspira-
tions and our fears. It is this physical composite which
constitutes the real, vital art of a people. It is not the
degree of attainment in a single phase alone which should

[109]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

serve as the basis of a true valuation; but rather it is the
degree of attainment and the co-relation of all. With this
broad interpretation of the term " art " in mind, it may
be assumed that art is not so much an expression of a peo-
ple's concept of beauty as it is a physical expression of
their composite ideas, or in other words, their culture.

A language, to be universal must be composed of sounds
representing exactly the same associate ideas. So it is
with art. Beauty is not a quality of universal appeal,
for the basis of valuation depends upon a group of asso-
ciate ideas rather than upon an intrinsic quality in beauty.

Ideas are expressed through forms, lines and colors in
art in the same way that ideas are expressed in language
by sound. We are responsive; we understand in exactly
the degree that the forms, lines or colors represent or de-
fine ideas which we possess. We speak lightly of a " uni-
versal art"; that does not now nor will it ever exist until
there shall have been a complete standardization of ideas —
or cultures. There are in art expressions a certain few
elements or phases of more or less universal appeal ; to that
extent is art universal.

We possess a group of ideas or conceptions which differ
in a fundamental way from those of Europe, both past and
present. The foundation of our government rests not
upon the principle that " Might makes Right," nor upon
the principle known as the " Survival of the Fittest," but
rather upon another theory known as that of " mutual de-
pendence." It is this latter principle, recognized first by
individuals, which led men to abandon their body arms, to
discard the moat and drawbridge, to destroy the walls of
their cities and therefor to substitute parks and rural
homes.

The last quarter century in America, in Europe, and at
the points where the great nations of Asia have come in
contact with the rest of the world, has witnessed a chaotic
condition of thought. Literature, art, and the processes of
government illustrate this fact. In America, and particu-

[110]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

larly in Europe, is this true. In Europe it is the old
against the new. In America it is the new endeavoring to
express itself through vocabularies and forms not only old
but foreign as well. Not only in the lives of individuals,
as witnessed by our many societies working for better social
and economic conditions, but in our governmental institu-
tions do we express an acceptance of the theory of mutual
dependence.

We have not as yet developed the political mechanism
of democratic government ; the present appears principally
as a conflict of interests. Yet it seems to me that inter-
woven in the fabric of our complex social structure there is
a definite tendency, so positive in its nature that it can
well be termed an ideal. The deeper channels of our
thought spring from a source, our conception of democracy,
which is as clear and as well defined as were the sources
of inspiration which evolved the great civilizations and
their architecture of the past. In our effort toward self
expression we have been adapting the institutions to the
past and in the same way we have endeavored to find an
adequate physical expression through the use of old forms,
at best possessing but a very limited number of elements of
universal appeal.

We speak of our cities as being " typically American " —
suggesting that they are adequately expressive of our day
and of our people. Superficially this may be true, but if
one looks more deeply into their structure, he finds that
they fall far short of being adequately expressive.

A structural element, the steel frame, came into existence
but a generation ago; it gave to an individual a power un-
dreamed of before. The old balanced relations of rights
and privileges in the ownership of property were completely
upset; this element had for an individual a power which
made it possible for him to turn his " rights," under the old
conditions, into acts detrimental to his neighbors. More
than that — the old conditions regarding light and air
were based upon an evolution of the idea of " mutual de-

[in]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

pendence." Suddenly the whole scheme of relations was
changed by the multiplication of ground areas ; and the
previous provision for light within the block, established
by tradition and law, was made absolutely inadequate. In-
dividual owners of property, clinging to the traditional re-
lations, asserted themselves against any new laws which
would make proper provision for light and air, not because
they had ceased to believe in the necessity for the same,
but rather and solely because they did not understand that
changed structural conditions had developed an entirely
new set of relations between individual owners of property.
They assumed that the city block could be developed plot
by plot; and that the idea of voluntary cooperation and
economic laws would solve the problem. They did not real-
ize that voluntary cooperation is an impossibility in such
cases ; nor that the laws and ordinances restraining the in-
dividual were not a set of restrictions but rather simple
acts insuring the principle of cooperation in building.

Our physical surroundings result from both a conscious
and an unconscious effort. Forces, agencies and ideals
go into the crucible of human endeavor and the product is
that which we see and feel about us.

The impulse urging on the inventor or the man of science
may be well defined; the reasons for, the object to be at-
tained by, and the ultimate effect of the effort may be per-
fectly clear, yet the first attempts in the search for an
adequate physical expression are always crude. These
initial, halting steps must of a necessity be taken. Man
must have something tangible with which to work. He is
blind to the errors of his reasoning until those errors con-
front him as forms which he can see and feel.

So it is with a people. They likewise are urged on by
many complex impulses toward a definite goal; and as with
the inventor, if those impulses are to become other than
mere aspirations, there must be provided a series of tangible
forms to serve as the initial stepping stones of progress ;
these first crude attempts, inadequate though they may be,

[112]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

are absolutely necessary, for it is alone through the strug-
gle for a proper and an adequate expression and the par-
tial successes that the ideal behind an impulse can be kept
alive. It is thus that the evolution of a people is insured
and augmented.

It is not of value here to discuss the agencies through
which other peoples have expressed their composite natures.
Our concern is with the agencies in our democracy through
which our peculiar culture may find an adequate expression.

If it be true that we have a definite ideal which we
have failed to adequately express in our institutions and in
our physical surroundings ; if it also be true that progress
or evolution can only result from a series of tangible ex-
pressions of our aspirations or our ideals; then the ques-
tion arises: What are the elements lacking and how can
they be supplied?

Without attempting an analysis of this complex ques-
tion, I shall assume as a premise that education is the
foundation upon which we must build, and also that the
educational methods of the present day do not provide a
proper foundation. Not until we shall have abandoned
our system of " puzzle education " in our schools and in-
troduced a system based upon some such educational philos-
ophy, for example, as advocated by Dr. John Dewey and
as carried out by Mr. Wirt in the schools of Gary, Ind.,
can we hope to provide conditions of the present day which
will have a very direct relation to ourselves as individuals.
The motive for study must be a knowledge of its value;
the knowledge of a need must precede the process of supply-
ing the need. Our whole educational policy has been a
sort of memorizing process ; few elements in it have been
related to the world of today. Our institutions and our
physical surroundings are accepted as being the result of
natural laws and in themselves quite unrelated to ourselves.
Our schools consider things in the abstract only; the ap-
plication is left to chance. This curious process — for
it is a process and little else — has led us to accept as a

[113]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

matter of course the most stupid physical arrangements
in our cities, our villages and our rural homes.

In a book, " A Civic Biology," by Mr. George W. Hun-
ter there is presented a method of teaching which is most
suggestive. The chapter on " Man's Improvement of his
Environment " indicates in a very specific way the possi-
bilities of presenting the subject of physical surroundings,
architecture and art to pupils whose previous experience
had not provided them with even the most primary concepts
concerning such things. This chapter in itself has little
directly to do with architecture; it considers methods of
improving sanitary conditions and subjects of a similar
nature. It would be a simple matter indeed to extend the
scope and include a group of subjects which would awaken
in the minds of the pupils a keen interest in other phases
of their physical environment of equal interest and im-
portance. The beginning of the chapter states that its
purpose is " to show how we as individuals may better our
home environments, and secondly how we may aid civic
authorities in bettering the conditions in the city in which
we live." The few phases of this subject touched upon in
this chapter cannot fail to awaken a keen interest, but it
leaves quite untouched the larger group of ideas upon
which town planning rests. This is too complex a subject
to discuss in detail here, but I can see the possibility and I
entertain the hope that someone will complete that chapter,
adding the ideas which will make it clear to the child that
there are things of interest for him to consider in our
towns and our cities which are of vital interest to his
comfort and his well being and which incidentally have to
do with architecture and art.

All this may seem like a Utopian dream. Why should
it? In the public schools of New Jersey, under the direc-
tion of Mr. Dana, city planning is being taught, together
with other subjects of a similar nature. Leaflet No. 23,
issued by the superintendent of the public schools of New-
ark, illustrates the scope and nature of the work. The

[114]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

subject is made interesting and personal through the use
of a local application of general principles. The child is
induced to see that his physical surroundings are not, in
many cases, adequate, and he is shown how few changes
would be required to make them right. The esthetic phase
of the subject appears as a resultant, and a more accurate
valuation is given to the many elements which constitute our
physical environment.

Upon the walls of our schoolhouses we hang only the
most noble examples of the art and architecture of the past ;
we conjure up theories of how the elements of beauty therein
contained will somehow elevate the taste of the child from
the farm or the crowded spaces within our cities. I doubt
whether they do anything of the kind. Under certain con-
ditions, when used as Dr. Haney uses them in his art teach-
ing in the public schools of New York, they become of
value and an inspiration, but as used at present in most
schools they are almost as inert as the plaster walls upon
which they hang ; they do not contain elements at all related
to the child's life. It would be possible by induction,
through the methods suggested by Dr. Dewey, and by start-
ing with simple physical illustrations most intimately
related to the child's life, to build up a sympathetic under-
standing of the meaning of simple forms and by comparison
to create a definite ideal of such a nature that when the
child went out into the world things would possess a new
meaning, and that meaning would be expressed in terms of
present day human interest.

It is quite possible through methods of suggestion to
create in the minds of the children in urban and rural schools
a definite ideal of adequate physical environment. If we
were to select from the best examples the world has pro-
duced photographs and slides illustrative of adequate physi-
cal conditions of a simple, intimate nature, and see to it
that the children were made acquainted with such ideas,
there would be developed not only a higher ideal, but there
would also be provided a very definite conception of the

[115]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

thing which would express that ideal. If in these illustra-
tive examples there were elements of beauty, then beauty
would become intimately related to life.

In our universities of higher education, with students
thus provided with an educational background, relating
forms to living conditions, it would be possible to extend the
teaching. Instead of filling the mind with a mass of facts
and formulas quite abstract in their nature, again we might
by inductive methods and suggestion show how it is that
the physical expression of community life results from a
multitude of social and community functions ; that political
methods and processes are the channels through which the
community expresses itself in its institutions and in its
physical aspects.

If we could demonstrate to the student that his ideal of
liberty, when expressed in terms of community life, means
a subordination of self-interest; that it is alone through
the acceptance of such an idea that he who lives in a com-
munity can actually possess in the concrete that liberty
which he assumes the Constitution to give him; if we can
give up a sufficient number of our theorems and our formu-
las to find time for such things, then we shall have estab-
lished the solid foundation upon which city planning must
stand if it is to be other than an empty phrase. Why not
teach, by illustrated lectures in our universities, the sub-
ject of town planning? Why not relate the student's ab-
stract notions of life and the vague ideas he holds to things
of actuality? Why not arouse his interest in the processes
of government by relating them to the things of a physical
nature which he can see and feel? Again would the beauty
of the thing assume a new meaning, and art and architecture
would become a vital thing related to life.

In the same way in our schools of architecture we have
failed to relate the teaching to the forces of our day. We
teach the resultant expression of past ideals and past cul-
tures. By some method similar to those already suggested
we must add to the training of the architect something

[116]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

which will force upon him the fact that it is not alone
through his efforts that a modern architecture may be de-
veloped, but rather that he shall be the medium through
which the forces shall be accurately expressed.

Our architectural schools have developed a splendid sys-
tem of logical thought in regard to the subject of plan.
All that is lacking is that it should be made more intimate
to our present day conditions and we should force home to
the architectural student the fact that our communities
are primarily social rather than physical structures.

The training of the architect as it is now carried on has
to do primarily with adequacy. Notwithstanding the
criticisms directed at our schools, which criticisms result
from the nature of the materials presented in our school
exhibitions, there is clearly to be observed a very serious
attempt, in the study of plan arrangement, to make form
follow function in a logical way. Most of the time spent
in study is devoted to the work of reasoning from a
premise — the program — and the object of that reason-
ing is to find an adequate physical envelope for a set of
stated conditions.

For us to assume that the school can evolve a new art,
that it can bring about the evolution of new forms, or for
us to further assume that it is the architect who can evolve
for us a modern architecture is absurd. Architecture is
not alone for the school, the university, the office or the
studio; it is the resultant of endless varying impulses act-
ing through those who design and those who fabricate.

I will say but a word regarding the function of the archi-
tect in the work of developing our cities. The work of the
architect of today is complex indeed; the greater part of
his effort centers about single problems, but the principles
which he applies to their solution are subject to the broad-
est application. He is a coordinator of many things, and
his constant study of bringing things into harmony and
proper arrangement enables him to render a service in
the field of city planning which no other individual is

[117]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

now trained to render. To him in many cases facts and
figures are not necessary. A sort of intuitive judgment in
the application of the principles of planning enables him
to vision rather than to calculate the forms which will ade-
quately express.

If the architect is to render the greatest possible service
in the work of city planning, two things are of fundamental
importance: he must assume the great responsibility im-
posed upon him by his training, his knowledge and his citi-
zenship. It is also of equal importance that his ability
and his fitness to perform certain functions be recognized
and given a proper valuation. His point of view must be
recognized in the development of the program and some-
thing of his visions must be included in the solution of the
problem. As I view the situation from the standpoint of
the architect, the object is to provide an adequate and a
proper envelope for a set of reasonable conditions rather
than to require of him, as we do now, that he attempt to
render pleasing a set of conditions the very nature of which
prohibits absolutely such a possibility.

It was but a few years ago that we recognized the serious
state of affairs existing within our cities, and when we first
endeavored to call them to the attention of the people, we
turned for our inspiration to the cities of Europe. We
were rather hasty in our choice of material by which we
hoped to arouse an interest in the work of city planning,
and we selected elements related to the esthetic side of city
planning in the hope that these would awaken a general in-
terest in the more serious side of the subject. Our first
appeal was expressed in the advocacy of the " City Beauti-
ful." In this we failed. The people had not developed to
a point where such considerations seemed pertinent, nor did
this phase appear to them to have anything whatever to do
with their more fundamental ideals concerning living con-
ditions. That the esthetic had a definite economic value
in a community was not easily demonstrated, for the simple
reason that the mind was working along other directions.

[118]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

A little later, however, when we had gone into the subject
more deeply and when we approached the problem from the
standpoint of social and economic values, considering such
subjects as housing, sanitation, congestion, etc., there was
a response. This response resulted not from the fact that
the new proposition was more easily demonstrated, but
rather from the fact that in our argument the people recog-
nized that there was an intimate relation between our effort
and their ideals of individual rights and liberty and ade-
quate physical environment.

I recognize that I have offered little of a definite nature
concerning the architectural side of city planning which
may be applied with immediate results. I have not dwelt
upon the specific contributions of the architect which affect,
in a material way, the physical aspect of our cities. I do
not ignore that phase of city planning because I deem it
of secondary importance; I simply pass it by because I
recognize that the time is not yet ripe for such a discus-
sion. The ugliness, the inadequacy of our surroundings
are not due to viciousness of character or commercialism,
as so many would have it, but to plain ignorance — a
chaotic condition of thought which has set up a false
standard of values. Our battle — and it is a battle which
we must wage — is not so much against a definite or
an established order of things as it is against chaos. Chaos
is our problem. To go on in an endeavor to express
chaos more adequately is about as futile in developing a
better civic architecture as is the attempt to sound a bell
in a vacuum.

It is for this reason that I say that it is alone through
the proper methods of education that we can hope in the
future to realize our vision. We may struggle with the
problems of the day, and through our effort we may slightly
deflect the current of our chaotic progress. But we can-
not hope that the generations which follow will find con-
ditions much less chaotic, nor can we hope that they will
find the task less difficult unless we follow the current of

[119]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

influence to the source and there establish an educational
system which will develop such an interest in our physical
environment that things will have an intimate relation to
our lives.

When we shall have accomplished this, then it will be
possible for those who think in terms wherein utility and
beauty are related as cause and effect to use a language
in which the symbols of expression will not only have a
universal meaning, but will also be related to the impulses
of our lives.

[120]

THE ARCHITECTURAL SIDE OF CITY
PLANNING

Arthur A. Stoughton

Member American Institute of Architecture, Winnipeg, Man.

For the last few years we have been so industrious in
telling city officials and commissions that city planning does
not mean the city beautiful that we have almost persuaded
ourselves that this is true. We have been so much con-
cerned with street widths and angles of light and building
laws and subsurface structures and areas of courts that the
opportunity to discuss beautiful architectural accessories
of city planning comes to me as an agreeable surprise.
This country is making rapid progress toward fulfilling the
scientific requirements of our trade because so much planning
is being done in the light of so much highly organized
study. It is relatively easy to fix the width of streets and
not impossible to tell how far apart to put them in a given
case; the books will tell how to orient them and anyone
can make a round point or traffic place. There are more
and more instances of good street planning in this country
because more new districts are being laid out here than else-
where and we have plenty of competent men to do it, but
such good work, with all its merits and its scientific accu-
racy, leaves the man in the street cold. Only a city planner
raves over a fine scheme on paper or made concrete only
in walks and curbs and pavements, because he only can
visualize its total effect in beauty which may never be fully
realized. I have in mind a grand avenue recently con-
structed in upper New York, 250 feet wide, with all the
potentiality of an Avenue des Champs-Elysees, which
should have been lined with fine residences, but on which

[121]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the high property values created justifies nothing short of
tenement houses. It is the total effect in beauty which we
are to consider briefly.

City planning, being so comprehensive, cannot consider
its duty discharged until its street system is given its proper
natural and architectural setting or background, is fur-
nished with the necessary fixtures conceived in an artistic
spirit and is enriched with objects of sentiment and beauty
for the enjoyment of all, such as those the old-world peo-
ples have always loved to place in their streets and open
spaces. What would the streets of most European cities
be, fine as their buildings are, lacking the fountains and
statues and columns, the commemorative tablets and monu-
ments, which speak in various language to the passer-by
of patriotism and glory and history of science and art, of
the things of the mind, of local pride, of aspirations and
moral values, of humor and gayety, of religious faith and
of life and death, running the gamut of the emotions, ap-
pealing to every sentiment and stirring thoughts in every
cranny of the mind? We think of many towns only in
terms of their ornamental features, which towns would be
uninteresting and bare without them, like an unfurnished
house. More than anything else, this furnishing of the
streets with ob j ects making a varied appeal — the gathered
mementos of the past, the artistic heritage of local and race
history and achievement — gives a place a personality and
an intimate and hospitable character.

From earliest times it has been a most natural custom
to decorate the highways and public places with memorials.
Our minds run back to the avenues of sphinxes, the obelisks
and the figures of men and animals, symbolizing the gods of
Egypt. Among the Greeks and Romans the votive offer-
ings, the religious figures, the effigies and war memorials
and edicules of various kinds added greatly to the interest
of the streets. The Romans were, par excellence, the
decorators of the public place, their architecture supplying
the finest setting possible in the noble colonnades and por-

[122]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ticoes, tying all the separate features into a harmonious
piece of decoration. The altars and rostra, the statues of
emperors and gods, the columns and triumphal arches have
each their part in the composition. The fine tradition was
followed by the Italians of the Gothic period and of the
Renaissance, whose spires and campanili and fountains
added a different though no less decorative note. The en-
richment of the street picture was not by any means pe-
culiar to the sunny southern countries where the open air
is natural, but northern places have held the same custom,
and especially in modern times, with expanding resources,
they have beautified the setting of their external life. In
the smaller ones we have a fountain, a market cross, a
wayside shrine, a figure of the local hero or the glorification
of the signal event. In the larger ones we have an Arc
de PEtoile, a Fontaine de l'Observatoire, a Pont Alexandre
III, an Albert Memorial, a Thames Embankment, a Scott
Memorial, a Sieges Allee, a Kaiser William I Monument, a
Washington Monument, a Grant Monument, and the like,
of too many species to mention even the types.

In the logical development of a town come first the
necessaries — the fixtures for lighting, the standards for
carrying wires and signboards, mail and fire boxes, the re-
ceptacles for waste, benches, shelters and waiting stations,
drinking fountains for man and beast, kiosks for vending
and advertising, public conveniences, entrances for subsur-
face structures, bridges and elevated structures. All of
these utilities must, of course, be treated decoratively so as
to be agreeable in form and to harmonize in scale and char-
acter with their surroundings. In many cases the original
useful purpose is merged in the decorative, and certain of
them, as fountains for instance, exist for the latter only.
In the next class may be put such conveniences as ramps
and steps, retaining walls, bridge approaches, and water-
side constructions generally, city gateways, park enclosures,
towers for beacons or bells, clocks and sundials, bandstands
and pavilions, which present an even more natural appeal

[123]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

for artistic treatment. Then there are all the resources
of nature, the plantation of mass and surface, the green
of the tapis vert with the glow of the parterre, and the
sparkle and tinkle of water. Then come the purely orna-
mental features, in which art and sentiment join hands to
add the highest touch of grace to the street picture, vary-
ing in a wide range between the bowlder bearing an inscrip-
tion and the triumphal arch or the many figured group.
Finally, above all there is the embellishment by buildings,
private or public, which line the streets or occupy open
spaces and make or mar them. This phase of the subject
is without the scope of this paper, but I may say that if
buildings are to enter into the decorative scheme of the
streets, they should at least be visible. It is sad to think
how much of the possible effect of fine buildings is never
realized on account of our long narrow streets and the
rigid adherence to the rectangular block. For buildings
as for monuments, a short vista gained by cutting off or
turning a street or broadening it into a decorative place
is necessary. I come from a place which glories in the
possession of several fine avenues 132 feet wide, giving un-
usual opportunities for architectural effect. One of them
is notable as being the longest street in the world. But
although running nearly straight for 875 miles, it turns
as it crosses another principal avenue and is faced on the
latter by a fine building by McKim, Mead & White, which
therefore has its full effect. Perhaps I should add in
another category those embellishments for which former
times give no precedent, which are the most obtrusive and
insistent of all and from which the most enlightened society
has so far been unable to protect itself — the advertise-
ments. I will say only that the state which finds a remedy
for this outrageous evil which renders nugatory all beauty
in our streets deserves a reward equal to that of the man
who conquers cancer or typhoid.

There are no rules for designing street features other
than those applying to works of art in general. The book

[124]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of suggestions is wide open and the aspect of foreign cities
and towns. When we turn its pages we find an astonishing
variety in the choice of motive, in treating and in placing.
Every problem of treatment and adjustment has its own
special conditions and its own best solution by which the
object shall be related most agreeably to its purpose and
sight and surroundings to give it individuality and dis-
tinction. To j)ass about the grand boulevards and along
the great east-and-west axis of Paris — one of our most
common mental promenades — gives a most complete ex-
position of the subject. We see the monument, isolated
or adossed, the column and the obelisk, the architectural
setting of sculpture, the group and the equestrian statue,
the fountain and pool, the triumphal arch and the city
gate, the decorative avenue leading up to a monument or
building, open places of various sorts, the splendid building
enhancing and being enhanced by its surroundings, the care-
ful use of the green of nature, the color of flowers and the
flow of water, the variety of effect of changing angles of
view, the terraces and balustrades and ramps and bridges.
Mr. Mawson has treated the subject so suggestively in his
civic art that it would be traversing ground too well covered
by him and too well known to you and for which the time
fails to discuss details here.

Our cities will scarcely put on the garment of beauty and
wear it with an air of ease and accustomedness until our
people gain that real culture which shows itself in the ap-
preciation of the fitness of things. Now, even in places
where objects of art are set up, we often see glaring and
ridiculous contrasts, like a man in full dress with tan shoes
or with dirty hands. I have in mind an example of this
where, in one of the most fashionably frequented city
squares in America, opposite one of our proudest hotels,
there is an island decorated with a bronze lamp, specially
designed, provided by an art association. The man who
operated a switch near by had made himself comfortable
by installing against this lamp a dilapidated rocking chair

[125]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

which was kept in countenance by a battery of street clean-
ers' rubbish cans, brooms, etc., as a permanent furnishing
of the spot.

But without this culture and love of beauty for its own
sake, and basing our plea on a lower plane, we should accom-
plish something if we could convince the authorities of the
money value of civic art. Just as many foreign products
command a high price purely for the element of beauty
of design in them, so a beautiful street or square or bridge
or building or monument raises the value of real estate in the
vicinity, while a city which as a whole is organized on attrac-
tive lines draws people and business and enterprises to itself ;
as its fame is carried far and wide by every chance visitor,
and recoups itself directly and indirectly for the outlay
many times over. Beauty as an asset convertible into real
estate values and tax returns is recognized by most foreign
cities, not yet sufficiently by ours. As soon as our people,
who are rather fond of dollars, realize this they will, of
course, hasten to invest in public art.

We of this country are fortunate in that few monuments
have been inflicted upon our cities, and that other fixtures
are not of a very permanent nature. Sculpture has de-
veloped as rapidly as architecture in the present generation,
and we are now for the first time in a position to memori-
alize great deeds and events by monuments that future gen-
erations will not feel like removing to sequestered depths of
the parks. Sunset Cox hailing a trolley car on Fourth
Avenue, New York, will hardly have any replicas, to men-
tion but one artless object set in high places. Despite the
absence of art commissions in many places and of competent
committees for the erection of memorials, much better work
is being done by reason of the general elevation of intelli-
gence which impels committees to seek expert advice in such
matters, and because better talent is available. It is far
better to leave our streets and parks bare of everything
but the necessaries for a long time than to fill them with
meretricious ornaments, debasing rather than elevating

[126]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

taste, setting a low standard preempting good sites, as it is
practically impossible to dislodge them on the score of bad
art once they have dug themselves in. It is well to proceed
slowly. All cities and towns, large or small, should be
urged to appoint art commissions or at least to secure
competent advisers for special occasions, and all such ex-
perts should be encouraged to do their whole duty in main-
taining the highest standard in civic art.

The placing of works of art with us is especially difficult
on account of the paucity of good sites furnished by the
gridiron plan, unmitigated by studied modifications or ac-
cidental irregularities. Our street system reduces us to
the necessity of placing our ornamental features, other than
those in parks, against buildings or near them or along the
edge of parks facing sidewalks, seen as we pass by, not as
we approach along a vista. This may be well enough
for small and minor objects, if we have enough of them
to spare for inconspicuous places, but the wisdom of group-
ing these things, whether they be few or many, is generally
conceded. For larger schemes and formal arrangements
the city planner must create sites and provide vistas for
the architect and sculptor and the gardener to use. When
we see the marvelous impressiveness and dignity of the
Place de la Concorde or the Kaiser Wilhelm Platz, the dis-
tinction each gives to a whole city, or the fine effect of many
smaller squares which may be simply the widenings of the
highway, artfully shaped and treated, it is strange that our
new cities, while they are in the making, should not provide
such advantages for the future. As traffic places or resting
spots for pedestrians, or accents in a general effect, or
opportunities for formal embellishment they would be in-
valuable.

Our planning, or our city growth without plan, has not
taken into account the amenities of street life, the chance
to pause in the mad rush to get a glimpse of nobler things
than trolley cars; to get a new hold on common life by a
suggestion of greatness from a monument or of grace from

[127]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

an object of art; to get the uplifting effect of a noble
colonnade or tower seen at the end of a vista or to get a
refreshment of mind from the greenness of ordered trees
or sward. It has sought only to furnish the greatest num-
ber of rectangular blocks. It is time for a new idea to re-
place this one. The city planner and the monumentalist
must cooperate in creating sites capable of a decorative
setting and of furnishing them suitably, as time goes on,
as places for the embodiment of the city's sentiments and
ideals and taste and for the elevation and distinction of
its life. Our inspiration is in the fountain of art ; our copy-
book is the achievements of the past ; our teacher the artis-
tic instinct of the ages.

[128]

THE ARCHITECTURAL SIDE OF CITY
PLANNING

George B. Ford

Chairman, Town Planning Committee of the American Institute of Architects

The World's Fair in Chicago in 1893 was an object
lesson to all who saw it of the wonderful possibilities of
architectural grouping and setting. So deep was the im-
pression that many on returning to their homes began
wondering whether something of the same effect might not
be secured in their own local public buildings. From this
started the movement for " Civic Centers " which has been
bearing fruit in so many of our cities. It is this movement
that has given voice to the slogan, " The City Beautiful."
As this work progressed people began to think, and the
more broadly they thought about the development of their
cities the more they came to feel that the " City Beautiful "
alone was only a small part of the matter ; that rather the
construction of all phases of the physical city should be
considered as a unit; that the city should be so planned
that its work and its play, that city living should be as
safe, healthful, convenient and agreeable as proper planning
could make it. Then a peculiar thing happened. The
social and economic interest in city planning became so
strong that the pendulum swung to the opposite extreme
and soon almost no one dared mention the term " City
Beautiful." People almost lost sight of the architectural
side of city planning. They failed to appreciate that what
is economically and socially good may be esthetically shock-
ing; that the offense to the senses may more than outweigh
the gain in well-being.

Now the citizens are waking up to the fact that once a
[129]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

plan is satisfactory from the standpoint of business effi-
ciency and social welfare, it need cost little if any more
to make it pleasing to the eye as well. Many are feeling
that oftentimes it is worth while to sacrifice a little of the
other elements in order to gain in beauty. The pendulum
is swinging back to the normal. Comprehensive, all-round
city planning is arriving.

Beauty is not something that is just applied after the
plans are worked out. Beauty is more than skin deep.
It must go back to the inception of the plan. At all stages
beauty should be considered as well as utility. We can
all understand utility, but while most of us appreciate
beauty when we see it, few of us can analyze a pleasing
effect and tell wherein its charm really lies. Architecture,
or better civic design, as it is often called when speaking
of civic architecture, is generally considered a rather mys-
terious subject, a subject to be left for its creation to the
initiated few. The existence of such a feeling is most un-
fortunate. The sooner that illusion can be cleared away
and the principles underlying good civic design are gen-
erally understood, the more insistent and general, and there-
fore the more effective, will become a popular demand for
seemliness in our cities. To this end we will try to present
the major principles of civic design, illustrating them from
well-known examples. From the first we find that the only
difference between architecture and civic design is one of
degree and application. In both cases the eye is satisfied
by the use of good taste in mass, proportion, placing of
ornament, scale, appropriateness and the handling of color
and materials. These are the same phases of design that
run through all art, from the study of the setting for a
jewel to the laying out of a great World's Fair group.
For each kind of work the principles have their different
technical application, but they themselves remain the same.

For example, the Union Station in Washington is very
good in mass ; the North Station in Boston is very bad. In
the Washington station the great central portion with its

[130]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

three great arches, the lower side wings with their lower
arches and columns and the great approach all hang to-
gether in perfect unity. In the Boston station, however,
the opposite is true. No two parts of the facade hang to-
gether. The total effect is chaos. The mass is bad.

Again, why is it that everyone is charmed by that per-
fect architectural gem, the New York City Hall, and at
the same time is left cold by the Post Office Building in
front of it and by the Old Court House behind it? The
City Hall could hardly be improved on in its proportions,
while the proportions of the various motifs in the Court
House and Post Office are crude and unprepossessing.
Good proportions in the design of any civic structure mean
that the eye will be satisfied and the prospect remembered
with pleasure.

The placing and distribution of details, their amount and
kind are all important. The Pan-American Union Building
in Washington is very happy in the disposition of details
on its facade and in the arrangement of architectural fea-
tures in its setting, such as the terraces, balustrades, steps,
pedestals, etc. The same is true of the placing of archi-
tectural and sculptural features in the approach to the
library of Columbia University. A splendid opportunity
for good civic decoration can be wasted by the erection of
a monument so unhappy in the spotting of its details as that
in the " Square " at Cleveland, Ohio.

Scale is a highly technical matter and very hard to
sense. A building or any civic structure is in scale when a
man standing just in front of it appears to be man-size in
relation to the structure. Most of the Gothic cathedrals
of Europe are in excellent scale, but when you see a man
in St. Peter's in Rome he appears like a pygmy. The
building is too large in scale. All of the motifs and decora-
tions are exaggerated to the verge of clumsiness. If the
scale is too small, a structure is apt to appear trivial. If
the scale is too large, it tends to become oppressive.

The appropriateness of the design of a structure to its
[131]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

function is a matter on which everyone has his own views.
Many question whether the heavy classic architectural
treatment of the Pennsylvania Station in New York is
peculiarly suited to the needs of the great modern terminal.
There is a distinct demand for a monumental treatment in
order to make it a worthy entrance to a great city, but it is
a debatable point whether a more open treatment would
not have given a greater sense of the movement of a city's
crowds. On the other hand the modern factory building
with its walls of glass, its construction strongly marked,
its elimination of all superfluous features is the acme of ap-
propriateness. Such crudeness of suitability to use would
rarely do in civic structures, for these must represent all
the dignity of the city government. A certain sacrifice of
the useful to the monumental becomes part of appropriate-
ness in civic design.

Attention to the possibilities of texture of surface and
of materials is something that we have not carried as far
in America as they have in Europe. We have become used
to the red pressed brick fagade with its rock faced granite
trimmings and its painted iron cornice. Yet what a far
cry from that to the beautiful texture and use of material
in the Morgan Library in New York, in the Wisconsin
State Capitol or in some of the recent suburban stations
about New York, as in Yonkers, White Plains and along
the West Chester and Boston Road. For the same cost,
good taste in the use of material and in the texture of sur-
faces can make a great difference in the appearance of a
structure.

The recent use of color in architecture in our expositions,
particularly in the wonderful color effects which are now
to be seen at San Francisco, has opened our eyes to new
possibilities in this field. We are afraid of color, especially
in our civic architecture. We excuse ourselves by saying
that it is undignified. The real reason is that we do not
trust ourselves to use it. But in view of the present ease
and cheapness with which colored terra cotta and colored

[132]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

cement can be made, I believe that our cities are not bound
to remain much longer somber, drab and monotonous. The
possibilities of the use of color are limitless and I prophesy
an early demand to have our cities brightened up.

In analyzing the principles of civic design, most of the
examples I have used are architectural because so few good
examples of civic design as such are available. The same
principles apply, however, in both cases ; the same reasons
exist in both cases for applying them.

It is charm of appearance that makes us proud of our
city. It is that which should justify us in spreading the
tale, wherever we travel, of what a wonderful city it is. It
is beauty of prospect and of buildings that first catches
the stranger's eye and suggests to him the thought that it
might be well to come and take up his lot with us. It is
only after such a first impression that he begins to think
seriously about the practical things that make up a city
plan. We must have beauty too. The full expression of
the best that is within us demands it.

Mr. Ford's remarks were illustrated by the following
slides :

City gates, ancient arches: Paris, Porte St. Denis;
Nancy, Place Stanislas. City gates, modern stations : New
York, Pennsylvania Station; New York, Grand Central
Station. City gates, water quays: Algiers, quay; Buda-
pest, quay; Venice, quay; Hamburg, Alster Basin; Paris,
quay; Vienna, canal portal; Chicago, river. City gates,
water bridges: Bolton Bridge; Spuyten Duyvil, N. Y.,
bridge design disapproved; Spuyten Duyvil, N. Y., bridge
design approved; Paris, Alexander III Bridge. Streets,
within borders transit : overhead wires ; London, Strand,
Isle of Safety; Edinburgh, Princes Street, poles; Vienna,
Opera Ring, lighting standards. Streets, within borders
transit: subway entrances; Paris, Elevated; Berlin, Ele-
vated. Streets, borders, building effects : Innsbruck, window
boxes ; Charlottenburg, party wall ; Diisseldorf , Tietz store.

[133]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Streets, borders, formal setting: Paris, Rue de Rivoli;
Paris, Champs-Elysees ; Paris, Avenue de POpera. Streets,
borders, informal setting: Antwerp, looking toward cathe-
dral; Oxford, High Street; Rothenburg, view; Rothen-
burg, plan. Street planning, residential grouping: Co-
logne, plan; Hellerau, view; Hampstead Garden, suburb
plan; Hampstead Garden, suburb view of residence square;
Hampstead Garden, suburb view of residence street ; Hamp-
stead Garden, suburb view of business street ; Port Sunlight,
view of Social Hall. Social and recreational grouping:
West Orange, N. J., playground; model playground with
school; Philadelphia, play center; St. Louis, social and
civic center. Civic grouping, civic centers, plazas: Forest
Hills Gardens, L. I., station plaza; Springfield, Mass., civic
center; Denver, Col., civic center; Cleveland, Ohio, civic
center, view toward Post Office; Brooklyn Plaza; Philadel-
phia parkway, art center, view toward City Hall; Paris,
Place de la Concorde; Rome, ancient forum; Rome, Vit-
torio Emanuele Monument; Vienna, Ring Strasse, first
plan; Vienna, Ring Strasse, present plan. General monu-
mental city planning: Canberra, Australia, plan; Wash-
ington, modified L'Enfant plan; Washington, bird's-eye
view, east ; Washington, bird's-eye view west.

[ 134 j

THE CONSTITUTION AND POWERS OF A
CITY PLANNING AUTHORITY

Robert H. Whitten

Secretary, City Planning Committee of Board of Estimate and Appointment,
New York City

At the last meeting of the National Conference on City
Planning the executive committee appointed a Committee
on Administrative Procedure, with Mr. Nelson P. Lewis
as chairman. The committee decided to take up the general
question of the constitution and powers of a city planning
authority, and in order to secure a wide basis of experience
for its work it caused a questionnaire to be prepared and
sent out widely to individuals and city planning commissions.
Eighty replies were received which show very careful con-
sideration of the subject, and although it will be impossible
even to abstract them, I think it will be important before
opening the discussion to give a summary statement of the
questions and of the replies.1

City planning involves (1) the creation, adoption and
revision of a tentative comprehensive plan for the physical
development of the city, and (2) the correlation of particu-
lar improvements, by whatever authority originated, with
the requirements of the comprehensive plan. The compre-
hensive tentative plan should include at least the following:
streets; parks, playgrounds; transit; grouping of public
buildings ; railroads, waterways ; terminals ; markets and the
districting of the city for the purpose of regulating the
height, area and use of buildings.

The creation of a comprehensive tentative plan involves
first of all a careful study of future growth and require-

1 See Appendix, pages 274-299.

[135]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ments. In order to plan for the present and for the future,
a picture is needed of what the city will or should look like
in 25, 50 or 100 years, when it has several times its present
population. For this purpose studies are required of the
probable growth and distribution of population and of the
probable development of business and industry. The prob-
able order of development is also important. We need not
only to know what areas will eventually be needed, for ex-
ample, for port development and for park purposes, but
also the probable order in which the various available areas
will be developed.

A comprehensive tentative plan having been worked out
and tentatively adopted, the next step is to secure the cor-
relation of particular improvements, by whatever authority
originated, with the requirements of the comprehensive
plan. As this comprehensive plan touches so many phases
of municipal activity, an efficient administrative organiza-
tion to secure the desired correlation is a most difficult
problem.

Provision must also be made for the revision of the tenta-
tive comprehensive plan. No amount of planning can avoid
the necessity for a considerable amount of reconstruction
and change. When invention and discovery are changing
the methods of work and of living throughout the world,
it is idle to think that we can so judge the future that our
present plans for the city's development will not require
change and modification. The " once for all " method of
city planning is therefore impracticable. We cannot adopt
a plan and make that the Procrustean mold for all future
time. City planning, to be effectual, must be sustained and
continuous.

The creation, adoption, application, development and re-
vision of the comprehensive tentative plan constitutes an
imposing program. It takes considerable imagination and
optimism to hope that it will ever be completely realized
in any city. A few cities have adopted and carried out com-
prehensive plans for particular functions, but using the

[136]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

term " comprehensive plan " in the broad sense above indi-
cated, no city has worked out, adopted and provided ef-
fectively for the continuous application, development and
revision of such a plan. In a large city this constitutes a
complex and difficult problem and the proper administrative
organization to grapple effectively with it may not be such
a simple matter as is sometimes assumed.

In American state and city government almost every ex-
pansion of governmental activity is initiated through the
instrumentality of a new commission. There is a fear of
intrusting the working out of new functions to existing
officials. Existing officials are already loaded with work
and it is thought that they will have neither the time, the in-
clination nor perhaps the ability to develop the new idea.
A new commission, composed usually of unpaid members,
is used to plant and care for the new undertaking, at least
during its development period. Often the new function
fails to take root as a permanent institution and the com-
mission dies. If, on the other hand, the new function be-
comes a recognized governmental function, it is sooner or
later merged with the general governmental organization.
The new function is transferred to the appropriate official
or department and the commission disappears. That is
inevitable; otherwise municipal government would soon be-
come an utterly disorganized tangle of boards and com-
missions.

The city planning movement will doubtless be no exception
to the rule. Doubtless the commission method will be used
largely in the earlier stages of the movement, but if the city
planning movement endures, it will ultimately be made a
part of the general governmental organization. The city
plan is so vitally connected with every phase of municipal
activity that it must be worked out in as close touch as is
possible with the existing administrative and legislative
authorities.

All this goes to show that it is difficult to dogmatize
concerning the constitution and powers of a city planning

[187]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

authority. The organization essential for the initiation of
the movement may be very different from the logical ulti-
mate organization. The appropriate initial organization
may vary in different cities with the size of the city, the
popular support forthcoming and the fitness of existing
officials for the development of this new function. We are,
of course, interested primarily in the result and not in the
machinery used. The most effective agencies at hand
should be availed of to start real city planning.

The typical city plan commission in America is made
up of a number of citizens who are not city officials and
who serve without pay. A commission thus organized has
certain advantages in the initiation of any new function.
Appointed solely for city planning purposes, the commis-
sion will devote itself unreservedly to that work. It will
take a broad view of the scope of city planning. It will
realize that it needs the assistance of city plan experts.
It will not be deterred by details and difficulties that loom
large in the vision of the practical city administrator. It
will have something of the missionary spirit in propagat-
ing the gospel of city planning. All this presupposes that
the commission is given adequate appropriation. A com-
mission with the best intentions in the world will fail ut-
terly unless its work and plans are founded on careful
investigation, and careful investigation usually costs
money.

A citizen commission of this kind has serious drawbacks
when it comes to the official adoption and carrying out of
a comprehensive plan. In the first place it is difficult to
see how a commission thus constituted can be given anything
more than advisory powers, i.e., of investigation and re-
port. The city plan affects so continuously, vitally and
broadly the administration of the city government that it
does not seem consistent with good administration to dele-
gate such far-reaching power to an appointive committee
of citizens. Moreover, a number of the city's departments
and officials are necessarily at work planning the city's

[138]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

physical development in so far as particular functions are
concerned. Any comprehensive plan will lose much in
practical efficiency and result in much duplication of effort
unless worked out in close touch with these departments
and officials.

All this is so important that in creating a city plan au-
thority in any city, instead of turning at once to the citi-
zens' commission plan, the ground should be very thoroughly
gone over to see to what extent existing official agencies
qan be effectively used. Only in case this search for
appropriate official material is unsuccessful should the alter-
native of a commission made up entirely of non-official mem-
bers be availed of, and then only as a temporary expedient.
It will usually be best to make up the commission partly of
official and partly of non-official members.

The ultimate development in any large city may well be
a city plan office that will have primary control of the de-
velopment and administration, but not of the adoption or
confirmation of the city plan. This city plan office may be
an executive department in one city and a bureau of the
board of estimate or other governing commission in another
city. The city plan office may have associated with it an
advisory commission of citizens or of citizens and officials.
The city plan office will develop the data required for com-
prehensive planning, will create a plan showing the future
physical development of the city and will submit to the
regularly constituted governing authorities of the city
such parts of the plan as seem desirable for adoption and
confirmation as the tentative official plan of the city. All
matters affecting the city plan will be referred to the city
plan office for investigation and report before being acted
upon by the general governing authority. The city plan
office will make recommendations for the continuous de-
velopment and revision of the tentative official plan.

Except in the smaller cities the function of an art jury
or commission should not be combined with those of the
city planning authority. The best art judgment will be

[139]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

secured by the selection of a group of art experts. City
planning is a very different problem and requires different
men and methods.

The organization of a city plan authority should be
within the powers of every city, but its creation should
be permissive and not mandatory. Moreover, the com-
position and powers of the city plan authority should not
be delimited by state statute except in the most general
terms. The city should have the utmost freedom to enact,
amend or abolish its city planning organization. This free-
dom of action and centralization of responsibility is even
more essential to efficient city government than is city
planning itself.

The power to confirm tentative plans submitted by the
city planning authority should be vested in the regularly
constituted governing authority of the city. The city
plan authority should, however, be granted the opportunity
to consider and report upon every matter affecting the in-
tegrity of the city plan, and action contrary to its recom-
mendation should require a two-thirds vote of the govern-
ing authority.

The formal confirmation of a tentative comprehensive
plan will come slowly. It will probably be inexpedient to
ask for an official confirmation of any but the most essential
parts of the comprehensive plan developed by the city plan
office. The city plan office, in formulating its picture of
the future city, will consider many facts and factors that
will necessarily have an important bearing upon its com-
prehensive plan and which may be tentatively included in
the plan, but which it would be unnecessary and inexpedient
to submit for official confirmation. The working out of
a comprehensive system of main thoroughfares is naturally
one of the first tasks of the city plan office. This is a mat-
ter, however, which, as in the case of most city planning
matters, cannot be considered separately. Transit, rail
and water terminals, markets, parks, building districts
and other matters must be considered before even a tenta-

[140]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tive system of main thoroughfares can be laid out. This
does not mean that the transit system, parks and terminals
shall first be laid out in detail, but merely that the system
of thoroughfares shall be designed to provide adequately
and economically for future transit, shall fit in with the
most probable development of rail and water terminals
and provide proper approaches and connections for the
park system. Having studied the thoroughfare system in
connection with provision for transit and other factors, it
will probably be advisable to submit the thoroughfare plan
for confirmation as a tentative or even final plan, even
though the transit, terminal and other parts of the com-
prehensive plan have not been sufficiently studied and elab-
orated to warrant their official confirmation.

The city plan office should realize at the start that its
one big job is the development of the comprehensive plan,
that it will not usually be in a position to make a unique
contribution to the solution of particular problems until it
has this comprehensive picture of the future city. It should
therefore guard against frittering its time away on number-
less apparently urgent and immediate problems and thus
lose the opportunity of ever becoming the real controlling
force in shaping the future city. This does not mean that
the city plan office may not with propriety advise in re-
gard to questions where its preliminary studies show that
failure to act would imperil the probable future plan.

The city plan office should have complete and direct con-
trol of the creation and administration of certain parts
of the comprehensive plan, and as to other parts of the
plan should act chiefly as the correlating factor. The
matters over which it will have practically exclusive control
will vary greatly in different cities. In many cities the
city plan office may be given practically exclusive control
over the general street layout. To better enforce such
control no plat of a suburban development should be re-
ceived for record until it shall have been approved as to its
street system by the city plan office. Moreover, no public

[141]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

moneys should be expended for improvements of any kind
in any street that does not conform with the city plan or,
if no final map has been adopted for that section of the
city, no public improvements should be made in a street
that has not been approved by the city plan office.

The question of compensation for buildings erected within
the lines of a mapped street subsequent to the confirmation
of a final map for such street presents serious difficulties.
Frequently the lines of an approved street cut into an in-
dividual holding in such a way as to render it impossible
of improvement without violating the proposed street lines.
In exceptional cases a man would thus be deprived of the
use of his property for an indefinite period if a rule were
adopted denying him compensation for improvements made
within the lines of the proposed street. Perhaps some plan
could be worked out by which compensation for buildings
would be denied unless previous notice of intention to build
had been given and the city allowed a period of three
months within which to purchase the property in question.

Any adequate solution of the problem of securing ad-
herence to a plan once adopted can scarcely be attained
without the application of powers and procedure similar to
those contained in the English Town Planning Act. This
is particularly well adapted to the laying of large suburban
tracts considerably in advance of the time when they will
become ripe for improvement. Such areas, chiefly in large
holdings, are doubtless greatly benefited by the application
of a comprehensive plan of streets, open spaces and build-
ing control. The owners can well afford to pay the costs
of a careful plan and to give up a certain degree of in-
dividual freedom in order to secure the undoubted advan-
tages of uniform development. Of course the confirmation
of such a plan would involve payment of compensation in
excess of assessed benefits in the case of a few owners. We
have no state department at all corresponding to the Local
Government Board of Great Britain, but the supervision
of such an authority is not deemed essential to the success

[142]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of the undertaking. The administration of such authority
might well be left to the city plan office, subject to the super-
vision of the established courts in certain matters.

The problem of intermunicipal planning and of planning
adjacent areas that will sometime become an integral part
of an existing urban center presents many difficulties. In
some cases it may be possible to secure some union of ad-
jacent local authorities to form a metropolitan district for
the purposes of city planning. In other cases a state super-
visory authority of some kind would probably be essential
to the working out and enforcement of a plan for the entire
urban area.

A state municipal department, with powers somewhat
similar to those of the Local Government Board of Great
Britain, might be helpful to cities and towns in many ways.
It could be granted a certain measure of control over local
accounts and finances and could give expert aid and advice
to the smaller cities on many subjects, including city
planning. There is, moreover, a broad field for state
planning that might be taken up by a state municipal de-
partment, or perhaps more appropriately by a state con-
servation department. This department would adopt a
tentative comprehensive plan of state development, high-
ways, railroads, waterways, forests, state parks, water
supply and all intermunicipal problems of physical
development.

[143]

SOME ASPECTS OF CITY PLANNING
ADMINISTRATION IN EUROPE

Frank B. Williams, Esq.
New York City

The average citizen is a pragmatist. To him the only
real test of a principle is whether it works or not. Logi-
cally, no doubt, this is not always a fair test. The prin-
ciple may be correct, the means of applying it faulty.
The average citizen will have none of such fine-spun dis-
tinctions. To get his vote you must " show him," and the
only way to accomplish it is to "do the job." Thus ad-
ministration, important in all practical affairs, is especially
so in matters, like city planning, where political support
is necessary and success is dependent upon votes. If city
planning in any community, badly administered, proves a
failure, it will be a long time before that community, what-
ever the new machinery of administration proposed, will
give it a new trial.

To us in this country the study of foreign methods of
city planning is especially important, both because city
planning is much newer here than in Europe and adminis-
trative methods are of slow growth and because political
administration is one of the things in which we have been
least successful. That we shall anywhere find methods of
city planning ready made, which we can with advantage
adopt, is not probable. Administrative methods are in no
small measure dependent for their success on local condi-
tions and the institutions of which they form a part. The
study of foreign institutions may indeed bring home to us
the necessity and even suggest the substance of amendments
to our own ; but in a country like ours, where city planning

[144]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

legislation is still too recent to be judged by its results, the
chief value, perhaps, of such a study is the basis which it
gives us for passing at least a provisional judgment on
our methods, their aims and the tendency to fulfill these
aims.

City planning is a science. In its application to different
localities it varies greatly, but everywhere the same prin-
ciples hold true, everywhere the main aim of city planning
is the same.

The main purpose of city planning is to bring about a
unity in the construction of the given community. Com-
munity life is a network of interests, each seeking its ex-
pression in the physical development of the community.
It is the lesson of city planning that these interests,
for their common good, must be harmonized and that
this harmony is attained only in the unity of the com-
munity of which each is but a part. City planning ad-
ministration is successful in proportion as it attains such
a unity.

What then are the means we employ here in the United
States to reach this end? After the at once scholarly and
practical paper of Dr. Whitten, to which you have just
listened, it is not my purpose to enter into a discussion
of the city planning institutions of this country. All I
shall attempt to do, in the limited space at my disposal, is
to give such an outline of the typical governmental ma-
chinery used for that purpose by us as will aid us in our
comparison of foreign city planning institutions with our
own. In all countries, and especially in a democracy like
ours, institutions in different localities vary. Yet here as
elsewhere there are generally institutions in each line of
governmental activity which, by their prevalence or grow-
ing popularity, may fairly be said to be the prevailing
ones. And so it is with city planning in the United States.
That institution is the local planning commission, specially
created to make plans for that locality and, perhaps, its
immediate surroundings, which shall include and harmonize

[ 145]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

all the many factors of physical development of the com-
munity. Thus the plan embraces not alone the street sys-
tem, but the parks and other open spaces ; the building regu-
lations, if any, including zoning or districting; the sites
for public buildings ; the transportation systems, both
local and long distance, with their freight and passenger
terminals; the public utilities, such as gas and water, and
their location, etc. Manifestly the commission cannot be
given full power to execute such an all inclusive plan. If
it were, the control over all public works and the regula-
tion of many private activities would be divided between
the commission and the regular city authorities, to the con-
fusion and destruction of all proper government. And
yet to narrow the scope of the plan is to destroy its com-
prehensiveness and the unity of development which it is
the purpose of the commission to create. Usually there-
fore — and this is the growing tendency — the commission
has only advisory power. Its task is to urge the regular
authorities to adopt the plan and develop the community
along the lines planned ; its duty is by its influence to pre-
vent construction by the community authorities on lines
that will interfere with the ultimate execution of the plan
in whole or in detail.

In its task of seeing that the plan is carried out, both
the commission and the regular authorities are hampered
by the fact that, except by actually taking the land neces-
sary for its public features, such as streets, parks and sites
for public buildings, there is no method in this country of
preventing private interests from infringing upon the plan
and often rendering its future execution, in whole or in
part, practically impossible. Wise planning anticipates
present needs, in order that present construction may con-
form to and aid proper future development. Wise planning
covers the whole city, in order that it may be constructed as
a unit. Present construction executes only such parts of
the plan as immediate need demands and financial ability
permits. Even the acquisition to any extent of the land

[ 146 ]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

needed in the future seems difficult and often impossible.
Thus the plan is a pattern to be filled in from time to time,
and unless at the outset there is some method of making
a general adherence to the entire plan binding upon land-
owners, it is likely to fail, in material respects, of realiza-
tion. The records of the planning departments of many
of our cities show how often private improvements have
compelled the city to modify or abandon important features
of their official plans. But our courts, after some vacilla-
tion, have held, everywhere where the question has arisen
except in Pennsylvania, that the imposing of a plan upon
the land of a private owner without compensation to him
deprives him illegally of property rights.1

Thus we in the United States, as a rule, seek to obtain
unity in our city construction by concentrating all city
planning power in a local city planning body specially con-
stituted for the purpose. To what extent is this good?
To what extent does it tend to bring about the desired re-
sults ? Unfortunately, with city planning legislation dating,
in this country, only from 1907, it is impossible to answer
this question by reference to results. It is therefore all the
more important for us to consult foreign experience. By
what machinery do they seek unity in the construction of
their communities? In the light of their methods and re-
sults is it probable that we can best attain our ends by
the methods at present in vogue here? What additions or
changes of method, if any, should we adopt?

Among the nations of Europe, in recent times, the long-
est and greatest measure of success in city planning has
probably been attained by Germany. Germany is a fed-
eration in which city planning is largely within the juris-
diction of the various states. We thus have there a va-
riety of experience to draw upon. Of all modern nations
she has excelled in political administration. Her bitter-
est critics freely admit the effectiveness, in every field, of her
wonderful organization. Thus for many reasons Ger-

1 Lewis, "Eminent Domain," 3d ed. (1909), sec. 226 and cases cited.

[147]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

many's city planning institutions and their results are a
study of value to us.

Preeminent in city planning as in most matters, although
by no means always in the lead, stands the state of great-
est power and prestige — Prussia. Her city planning act
of 1875, l preceded, however, by the Italian act of 1865 and
the Swedish act of 1874, along somewhat the same lines,
is an important step in the history of city planning legis-
lation — an importance much increased by the wealth of
experience Prussia has had under the act and the influence
of the act in other German states and to some extent in
other countries.

The central feature of the Prussian act is the method
and purpose under it of fixing the lines of the streets.
Prior to 1875 these lines were established from time to time
as immediate occasion arose by the state police, for police
considerations, such as safety, and the immediate demands
of traffic, rather than, as a rule, in accordance with any
general plan. The act of 1875 authorizes the establish-
ing of a general street or, as the act expresses it, " build-
ing " plan. In the fixing of street lines regard must be
paid to considerations of traffic, safety from fire, public
health and safety from disfigurement of the public streets
and squares, not only for the immediate present, but for
the future. The street lines are now to be fixed by the
local authorities. From the time of establishment of the
street lines the authorities may forbid building within them.
No payment is made the landowner for the establishment of
the plan, although of course he is compensated when his
land is actually taken.

It will probably be admitted by city planners generally
that, subsequent to 1875, city planning has been more gen-
eral and more successful in Prussia than in any state out-

1 "Gesetz betreffend die Anlegung und Veraenderung von Strassen und
Plaetzen in Staedten und laendlichen Ortschaften, vom 2 Juli, 1875," pop-
ularly called the "Baufluchtliniengesetz," to be found in the "Preussi-
sche Gesetzsammlung " for 1875, p. 561.

[148]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

side of Germany. It is therefore of interest to us to ob-
serve that unity in community construction has not been
attained there by constituting a special city planning body
for the given community, to whom all city planning power
is given; that there is no official map, required or recog-
nized by law, that attempts to include all the factors of
community development and that it is not even true that
all city planning authority is in the hands of one official or
body in the given community.

The Prussian act of 1875 gives the city authorities them-
selves the power to establish their own " general street
building " plan * and makes it binding upon landowners.
That plan is merely a street plan. It does not, in any way
binding upon property owners, include parks or sites for
public buildings. To be sure of them these same local
authorities must actually buy the land at private sale,
which they may do without proof of need for any specific
public purpose. Railroads, their extensive stations and
terminals are no part of the official plan of the city ; they
are wholly within the jurisdiction of imperial or state offi-
cials. Vitally as building regulations, which prescribe the
materials and methods of construction and fix the bulk and
use of buildings and the location of residential and indus-
trial buildings according to districts or zones, are related
to the location and character of streets, even building regu-
lations in Prussia are not a part of the official city plan or
issued by the local authorities who establish that plan, but
by the state building police.

A greater unity of authority in city planning is attained
in many of the states outside Prussia. The complaint is
bitter in Prussia that the local authorities cannot issue the
building ordinances, and the example of Saxony and most

1 The plan is usually prepared, as are all matters, by the upper branch,
or administrative board (Magistrat) of the city assembly, for the considera-
tion cf the lower branch, or council; the actual work being done by an ad-
ministrative department (often what corresponds to our street department)
under the supervision of a committee of the administrative board.

["149]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of the South German states is cited, where building regula-
tions are either expressly recognized as an integral part
of the official or general street building plan of the city or
issued by the same local authorities.1 Nowhere in Ger-
many, however, is there a planning body specially consti-
tuted for cities or other localities with power to include all
factors of community development in their plan ; 2 nowhere
is all city planning power placed in the hands of any one
authority; nowhere is an official plan provided for which
shall contain all the factors of city construction and
development.

How then is that unity, so clearly seen in the construc-
tion of German cities, obtained? By the knitting together
of all government, local, state and even national. The
regulation of manufacturing, which is at the basis of the
creation of industrial districts throughout Germany, is im-
perial, but that regulation is in part a permission to the
states to regulate in certain respects and by given meth-
ods.3 The states usually impose the duty of this regulation
upon local officials, who act, so far as this duty is con-
cerned, as state agents. It is the usual practice in Ger-

1 The building regulations are recognized as a part of the street building
plan in Saxony ("Allgemeines Baugesetz vom 1 Juli, 1900," sec. 16) and to
some extent in Wtirtemberg ("Bauordnung vom 28 Juli, 1910," art. 11).
In Wurtemberg the general law, just cited, makes certain building regula-
tions, which local ordinances may vary (see art. 39, 56, 59, 94), and the
law is similar in Baden ("Landesbauordnung vom 1 Sept., 1907," sec. 2,
109). In Bavaria the building regulations, so far as they are not prescribed
by general law or local ordinance, are fixed at the same time that the build-
ing line is determined ("Bauordnung vom 17 Feb. 1901-3 Aug. 1910," sec.
2, 3). In Saxony the general law lays down building regulations which are
in force only if the local authorities do not pass such regulations by ordi-
nance ("Baugesetz," already cited, sec. 90 ff.).

2 The nearest approach in Germany, of which I have knowledge, to the
American local [planning commission is the Munich Local-baukomission,
whose sole duties are with relation to the street building plan, the building
ordinances and a few minor matters — by no means the whole field of city
planning.

3 " Gewerbeordnung fuer das deutsche Reich, vom 21 Juni, 1869," to be
found in the "Bundes Gesetzblatt des norddeutschen Bundes" for that year,
p. 245.

[150]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

many to assign state duties not to officials exclusively in
state employ, but to local functionaries. The authority of
the state over its agent is nevertheless preserved. The
local official, as a state officer, must follow the instructions
of his state superiors ; appeals from his acts lie to state
authorities, who maintain the policies of the state. For
instance, the state building police, who in Prussia issue the
building and districting regulations, are, it is true, in a
few of the largest cities, like Berlin, solely state officials;
but in most of her cities these duties are intrusted to the
burgomeister, or mayor, or to the upper administrative
board of the city — both local authorities ; and whether
solely state officers or local officials as well, they execute
the will of the state, carry out her policies and obey her
superior and supreme officials and rulers. Nevertheless
harmony between state and local provisions cannot but
be promoted by the use of the same officials for promul-
gating both.

Where there is not this use of the same person or body
as the agent of different authorities, there are often provi-
sions for notice to the various authorities concerned and
consultation between them. For instance, in Saxony the
building police (state officials) are charged with the duty
of examining the general street building or official city plan
fixed by the local authorities and seeing that all the public
authorities affected are notified and the necessary changes
made in the plans to guard their interests.1 Among these
authorities are the military, forest, railroad, state high-
way, officials, all state authorities ; the church and school
authorities, local officials ; and the authorities of neighbor-
ing communities, who must as well be consulted.

It should also be remembered that local self-government
does not mean quite the same thing in Germany that it
does with us. While the field of that government is broader
there than here, the extent of it is limited by appeals from
local action to state authorities, by state inspection of the
1 "Baugesetz," cited above, sec. 21.

[151]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

acts of local authorities and by the necessity for the rati-
fication in many cases of local action by state officials. In
street planning, which very generally is done by local bodies,
as in the matter of building regulations, which in many
states is, in greater or less degree, also a local matter, the
final authority throughout Germany is the Minister of the
Interior or some similar minister of the ruler. In Prussia,
it is true, the " street building " plan does not need his
ratification, but appeals from those who feel themselves
aggrieved by that plan go to him or his subordinates. In
most German states outside Prussia the " building street "
plan must have his approval, and, generally, he may give
or withhold it on any ground he sees fit, including the
ground that the plans are not for the general welfare or
suited to the community in question, or that the rights
of other authorities or communities are not sufficiently con-
sidered. Thus this common state authority, to whom all
may appeal, tends to unify and harmonize all interests.

Eminent as Germany is in city planning, she by no means
stands alone among European nations. It was Italy which
was the first to pass city planning legislation along modern
lines under her act of June 25, 1865, entitled " The Law
of Expropriation for Purposes of Public Utility." Plans
are divided into regulation plans, as they are called, for
the built-up portions of towns, and extension plans, for
their newer parts. Both these plans, however, may be
united into one common plan for the entire community.
The responsibility for the drawing up of the plan rests
upon the mayor of the commune. It is his duty to present
the plan to the counsel of the commune for adoption, after
which, to be in force, it must be ratified by the king. The
commune now has at once the right to take the necessary
land by condemnation. The plan is binding upon all land-
owners affected by it for twenty-five years, and this period
may be extended by royal decree. No person who makes
any improvement interfering with the plan for the purpose
of making a profit is entitled to any compensation. Any

[152]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

improvement made after the plan is made public is re-
garded as made for profit and is not paid for by the com-
mune when it takes the land on which the improvement was
made. One-half of the increase of value of any land due
to the plan must be paid the commune. It has been found
that this increase, on the average, about pays for the con-
struction of streets and similar features of the plan. Thus
it will be seen that Italy anticipated by ten years some of
the most important features of the Prussian act of 1875.

In 1909 England passed her first act professedly dealing
with city or town planning.1 All the planning powers
under the act are given to the authority of the locality,
subject to the supervision and control of the Local Govern-
ment Board of the central government. These powers are
extensive. Even acts of Parliament may be superseded by
the " scheme " which these local authorities enforce. The
plan which they make binds private landowners. But the
law selects for planning " land which is in course of de-
velopment or appears likely to be used for building pur-
poses." In other words the act deals, practically, with
undeveloped areas, only, in or near cities and towns. It
does not attempt to plan cities as a whole. Admirable and
full of lessons for us in many respects as this act is, it
does not furnish us with a basis of comparison with our
own planning, which treats cities as organic wholes. Eng-
lish city planners recognize the defects of their act, and
before the war began there was a good prospect of its
speedy amendment in some way so that plans should cover
entire communities.

What then is the lesson of European experience in city
planning administration for us? First, as it seems to me,
that some method of making certain features of the city
plan binding on private property owners is essential. This
is fundamental in city planning legislation in Italy,
throughout Germany and in England. Even in England,
however, where only the undeveloped part of towns and
1 9 Edward 7, chap. 44.

[153]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

cities is planned in any binding sense, no attempt is made
to include all these features, and in Germany only the street
system — including, in most cases, building and districting
regulations — is so planned. Even with these limitations
the freer and more democratic of the German states have
felt it necessary to protect the landowner from injustice
by specifying when he has the right to demand that the
community shall at once take and pay for his land, sub-
jected to the city's plan.1 This is perhaps an indication of
the care we must take, and perhaps of the methods of tak-
ing care, that our own legislation giving binding force to
certain features of the city plan may be constitutional and
just.

There remains the most important question: Does Ger-
man experience tend to show that our prevailing method
of planning — the specially created local commission with
the duty to include all factors of community development
in its plan, but with only advisory power to secure its
adoption — is unsound? In my opinion, no. Both Ger-
man administration and ours have the same aim — unity
in community construction. This aim we cannot attain —
if indeed we altogether desire to do so — by the knitting to-
gether of all governmental institutions, as in Germany.
Attain this city planning unity we must, but in our own
way. The all inclusive plan of the American Planning
Commission, if followed, in its main features, does give
the desired unity. The planning commission can secure the
adoption and execution of its plan by the city officials only
by educating the public. This is good for the public and
for city planning, for a cause can, in a democracy like
ours, succeed only when it has intelligent public opinion
back of it, and should ask for success on no other terms.

1 A good illustration is furnished by a provision of law in Baden:
"The owner of a lot that has not been built upon can require the commu-
nity to take it at once if, according to the established plan, the lot is to be
surrendered in its entirety, or if and so far as it, in consequence of its loca-
tion on an already existing street, is suitable for building, or if the lot is
destined to be a public square, and the land for the streets surrounding the

[154]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Discussion

Thomas Adams, City Planning Adviser Conservation
Commission of Canada:

I am in a somewhat difficult position this morning, as I
disagree on some points with the two speakers who have
preceded me, and rather more I should say with Mr. Wil-
liams than I do with Dr. Whitten. I think it is my business,
sir, to open the discussion and to deal with papers that
have jbeen read. I will therefore endeavor to confine at-
tention to the points raised in those papers rather than to
open up new issues.

In the main I think the suggestions made by Dr. Whitten
are sound, except in so far as he introduces the word
" tentative." In my experience no scheme that is brought
forward of a tentative character is of much value except
as an illustration for the information of the officials and
the city council which is dealing with the matter. And
once a city planning scheme reaches the stage of being a
definite proposal to be carried out in practice it necessarily
ceases to be tentative in its general form, and it must
cease to be tentative in its details and provisions if it is
going to be of any value whatsoever. The whole point is
very strongly put by Mr. Williams in one of the last
paragraphs of his paper where he says : " First it seems to
me that some method of making certain features of city
town planning binding on private property owners is es-
sential."

Everyone knows the extent to which town planning
touches private property, and we have got to realize the
ramifications of city planning in that respect before we fully
realize the necessity for making our schemes definite and

square has been acquired by the community." ("Ortsstrassengesetz vom
15 Oktober, 1908," sec. 8, par. 21.)

The law with relation to land destined to become a public square is the
same in WUrtemberg ("Bauordnung," cited above, art. 15, par. 6) and Anhalt
("Bauordnung vom 19 Juni, 1905," sec. 14, par. 5).

[155]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

making these schemes before we start to operate them, mak-
ing them of a character that we can secure legislative sanc-
tion for the provisions they contain.

Now the question of having a tentative plan or scheme
is suggested, I think, because of the absence of legislation.
Because there is no legislative power to back up a definite
proposal for city planning some other method of securing
the object is being sought. We do not speak in Canada,
where we have legislation, or in Great Britain, where they
have had the act since 1909, of a tentative plan, because
we have got legislation to make it definite. Here, because
of the constitutional difficulties perhaps in obtaining the
powers to get definite plans prepared which you can make
legal in form, I think the danger is that you are going to
seek some method of escape from these difficulties and be
content with a tentative plan.

Now what does the average tentative plan amount to?
Detroit has had its tentative plan and, because it was tenta-
tive, it has failed to a large extent. Had the foresight and
intelligence of those men who designed the central scheme
for this city, had that been interpreted or incorporated in
terms of law and made an act of Parliament which could
not be altered, Detroit would have been a better city to-
day. But because it was capable of variation according to
the whims of a transitory municipal authority, because it
was tentative and because there was no continuity of ad-
ministration behind it, it was not properly carried out.
When a plan is tentative it is subject to every whim and
fancy of those who are in political power.

You may say, for instance, that your by-law system,
that our by-law system in Canada is tentative. The city
of Toronto may today pass a by-law that the heights of
buildings in Toronto shall not exceed 100 feet and a week
later it may decide they shall be 150 feet. It desires to
keep that power, that discretionary power, but see how
it injures the interests of those who have a large stake in
property of the city. Apart from that — and I think to

[156]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

some extent that interferes with some of the arguments in
Dr. Whitten's paper — apart from that I should subscribe
to most of his suggestions, except this: I would say it is
absolutely essential for town planning in the United States,
as it is with us in Canada and it is in Great Britain, it is
absolutely essential to have some constitutional state au-
thority to supervise and to administer town planning.

You have, I think, a very good example of the method
to pursue from our Canadian experience. We have not
the constitutional difficulties that you have in these states.
Our provinces are fairly powerful in the matter of dealing
with municipal affairs and even with the right to deal with
private rights in property. We do not appear to have
the interference of the lawyers with our democratic prin-
ciples when we touch these questions. A lawyer-made law
is sometimes very fair and sound in principle, and I am one
of those who plead for the lawyer in city planning, but in
a democratic country, while you may want to limit discre-
tionary power by democratic measures, you do not want
that discretion so frequently overridden by legal techni-
calities.

Where some of our friends make the mistake is that they
forget the lawyer. They prepare a fine scheme, they lay
down a fine system of diagonal streets, a civic center and
many suggestions which are excellent in themselves. And
then they go to the lawyer and say : " We want to carry
these out." Why, they should have gone to him be-
fore they started and got his opinion as to how to carry
them out and the powers required to carry them out. The
lawyer is required to come in at the earliest stage in con-
nection with town planning and not in the final stages ;
otherwise he necessarily impedes progress rather than helps
it.

Now, with regard to the paper of Mr. Williams, I do
not want to be regarded as in any way prejudiced against
German methods. I have spoken as enthusiastically as any-
body about Germany and its town planning. I have vis-

[157]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ited many of her cities and admire them in some respects.
But I think, if I may say so, that Mr. Williams, while he
seems to have studied German town planning very closely,
does England this injustice — that he has not given it
sufficient attention. The only criticism I would use with
regard to German town planning is a quotation which I
ventured to submit to the conference last year, which I
will repeat and which comes from a Berlin source, not from
my own lips, plus a statement of Mr. Williams himself,
because to some extent he is self-contradictory. The state-
ment I quoted last year was from the " Westminster Ga-
zette," from a Berlin correspondent:

"Town planning in Germany is being reformed on prin-
ciples borrowed from England, but the inadequate town
planning still practised by most important municipalities
drives building land to extravagant prices and militates
against the provision of dwellings."

Now the first object of town planning is to promote
sound business conditions and sound living conditions. And
the first result of town planning in Germany appears to
be to destroy the main object for which the town planning
schemes are prepared.

Mr. Williams in his paper says : " The central feature of
the Prussian act is the method and purpose, under it, of
fixing the lines of the streets." This is the central feature
of an act which, he says, is by far the greatest measure
of city planning in Europe. It fixes the lines of the streets
and matters of a similar kind. But, as he knows, the
Prussian act of 1875 was based practically on the Italian
act of 1865 and the Swedish act of 1874 and is not a town
planning act at all. It is a series of regulations governing
building lines and street lines, and was only called a town
extension act. The Italian act and the Swedish act have
been successful, but they have not had the driving force of
the Prussian autocracy behind them. That is the only real
distinction between them. And that autocracy is of im-
mense value in a matter of this kind to secure an even sky

[158]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

line, a harmonious grouping of buildings or a satisfactory
building line. But the price you may have to pay for it
is the price of liberty. You might in a democratic country
say that men shall not put up buildings higher than six
stories, but you cannot say that every building shall be six
stories in a particular street, otherwise you would have
everybody relieved of office in the responsible city council
at very frequent intervals. After all we are prepared to
accept the kind of autocracy which says : " You shall not
do wrong," but. we are not prepared to accept the dicta-
tion of another man who says : " I know the way, and it is
right, and nobody else knows it, and you have got to do
what I tell you."

We must have in a democratic country that amount of
restriction which will prevent us from injuring our neigh-
bors; but after all, this great continent has to thank the
inspiration of liberty and its democratic institutions for
the greatness which it has attained, and we will have to base
our city planning on that democratic foundation. We
must make our town planning democratic. And it is be-
cause we have to make it democratic that I disagree with
Mr. Williams in his suggestion that Germany offers any-
thing in the way of an example.

The boulevards in this city are as fine as the boulevards
you will find in some of those German cities which are so
highly praised and which are looked upon as a Mecca for
American tourists. I have heard a German — Professor
Eberstadt — himself say that the external features of city
planning in Germany, the grandiose and spacious streets,
are merely for the purpose of impressing the visitors. He
was one of those men who took a very strong stand that
all that money which was spent in German cities in making
those fine streets and securing those fine architectural ef-
fects was so much money taken from securing healthy con-
ditions for the poorer people of those cities. There seems
to be some truth in that, because in Berlin 65 per cent of
the people are living in houses of less than three rooms, as

[159]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

against, I think, about 25 per cent in the great city of
London, where we are regarded as having so many slums.

I do not wish to press this point regarding housing con-
ditions, because on former occasions I have dealt rather
fully with that question as one which was being neglected,
and I think that the Conference has been taking it up se-
riously enough; but I would like to try and indicate or
repeat some of the considerations which seem to me to be
necessary to be repeated in order that we may come to a
proper understanding of what we in Canada regard as
proper town planning.

I would like to say, first, that I listened with a great
deal of pleasure to those who spoke last night on the
architectural side of town planning. We want to give
that every possible consideration, but I do not think we
want to forget this — that the city exists for the purpose
of carrying on business. You can have a city or a town
without a civic center and it can still exist, although it may
not be satisfactory, but you cannot have a city unless
there is some business purpose connected with its existence.
The raison d'etre of a city is to carry on business. It may
be to distribute agricultural produce, it may be to manu-
facture motor cars, it may be to manufacture laws, as in
Washington, but there is a business purpose for the foun-
dation of every city. The conservation of its business in-
terests is necessarily the first consideration of the town
planner. The promotion of healthy conditions of home
life is a second consideration.

Now to say that the foundation of town planning is
business and healthy housing conditions is not to say that
architecture need be neglected. These things come later.
They are the expression of the intelligence and the artistic
qualities of the people as a whole, and they are the expres-
sion of the civic conscience of the people as they build up
the city, but they do not form the foundation of city life.
To say that this hotel first requires a foundation is not
to say that it does not require a superstructure or that the

[160]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

superstructure is unimportant. But the foundation of
those buildings comes first and it has a great deal to do even
with the architecture, and certainly it is necessary to have
the foundation before you put up the building. The foun-
dation of your town planning is the consideration of the
business interests and the home conditions of the people.

When you consider that and when you consider the
numerous private interests that have to be dealt with in
preparing your scheme, then you see the necessity of having
legislation behind you in order to do so on satisfactory
lines.

Now there is one suggestion by Mr. Williams regarding
English methods in which I think he has somewhat mis-
understood the British act. He says : " The act only ap-
plies to land in the course of development or land likely to
be used for building purposes."

The act does apply primarily to that land, but it may
include the land already built upon if there is any reason
for including such land. If the Local Government Board
in its opinion decides that a building lot or building land
ought to be included, it can include it, but it merely means
this — it places the responsibility for including the built-
upon land on a special decision of the Local Government
Board, and I think rightfully so. It merely means that
before you include a built-upon lot you will have to go
carefully into the question of whether you are going to
interfere with those who have erected those buildings and
invested their money in them, and whether it is necessary
for some purpose of the scheme to include such land or not.

If, for instance, a town planning scheme were prepared
for Detroit, a great part of the city might very well be
left out of the city planning area, because there is nothing
that you can do with it at reasonable expense. Therefore
you may as well save yourself the trouble of serving notices
on all the owners in order to include that land. But in
order to overcome any ambiguity about that question in
Canada we say in our act, which is based on the British

[161]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

precedent, we say that all land may be included in the town
planning scheme. We thus make no distinction between
land that is already built upon and land that is not. At
the same time, in practice, I am certain a great deal of
land which is already built upon will be excluded. The sug-
gestion has been made by Mr. Williams that because in
England they proceed by means of sectional schemes, there-
fore it is a district planning act and not a comprehensive
city planning act.

Well now, if any of you engineers or architects can real-
ize what it means to plan Greater London, can you imagine
any practical way of doing it as one comprehensive scheme?
Take 1000 square miles, put it on one map of 25 inches to
the mile and it would carpet a considerable part of this
city of Detroit. To deal with an area of 1000 square
miles, 640,000 acres, you will have 100 maps, each contain-
ing 600 acres and each of which would certainly cover the
two panels of this wall which you see on the left. Just
imagine the difficulty of making one large map instead of
100 for that area. You couldn't do it and you would
therefore have to proceed in sections, for practical reasons
connected with the preparation of maps.

Take another point. There are 137 authorities in the
area of Greater London. Each of those authorities has
jurisdiction in its own area and each of them has to deal
with its own separate area. Schemes have to be prepared
in sections, therefore, for the purpose of giving each au-
thority power to plan its own area. The authorities are
made by the Local Government Board to cooperate and to
secure one unified plan. Now if all I can hear about the
United States is correct, adjacent authorities do not al-
ways agree, for instance, in having one water supply, even
when desirable, upon methods of administering their joint
areas. Now if it is difficult to get two authorities to agree,
how much more difficult is it to get 137? And yet these
137 authorities in Greater London are trying to determine
the whole of the main arterial roads in an area 1000 square

[162]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

miles as the basis for their series of town planning schemes.
On that basis each separate local authority has to prepare
its own scheme, and in that respect it is sectional. But
uniformity is secured by the central administration of the
Local Government Board, which has to approve every one
of those sectional schemes. You see the importance of
this natural or state supervision for the purpose of securing
united action.

Now Highland Park is outside of Detroit. If Detroit
prepared a town planning scheme, it would be a great mis-
fortune if Highland Park did not work in with that scheme
and prepare a scheme which would be in harmony with it.
Yet as human nature is, and with your form of municipal
government, it is very unlikely that the authorities will
agree without some pressure from a state department.
By having this state department and this legislation in
England they not only can get two authorities to work to-
gether, but 137 in one district. Those 137 are giving
themselves up in this time of tragedy in Europe to confer-
ences for the purpose of trying to settle these very ques-
tions with which we have so much difficulty on this side of
the Atlantic. As Mr. Crawford pointed out yesterday,
authority to prepare schemes has been given, or is about
to be given, to about 120 local authorities or municipalities
in England in respect of areas which will provide for a
population of about 18,000,000 people. These schemes
are prepared in advance of the requirements by from 25 to
100 years. I think that the misapprehension regarding
them being sectional is due to the fact that as a matter of
practice they have to be sectional for reasons I have given,
but unity is obtained by the central department.

I think it is right that we should at these discussions ex-
press our differences of opinion and try to get at the truth.
That is what I think we are here for. I think we are here
to talk about technicalities and not to ignore them. We
are here to deal with the matter in a businesslike way and
not solely from the point of view of the artist. We are not

[163]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

to ignore his point of view, but we are also to consider
what is necessary for securing his and other purposes on a
sound financial basis. And we have at the same time to con-
sider that the truth is often best obtained by each of us
getting up and expressing a different point of view. What
I have endeavored to make clear is that a central state de-
partment is necessary to supervise municipal action in city
planning, that plans must be definite and not merely tenta-
tive and that to accomplish these purposes legislation is
necessary as a preliminary.

With regard to actual experience I think while I am on
my feet I should like to indicate what we are doing in
Canada. We have our Commission of Conservation at
Ottawa, which is a Dominion department. The depart-
ment is advisory and is not an executive body. They take
the attitude that their duty is not only to conserve natural
resources, but is to conserve human life by promoting pub-
lic health, and even to conserve the finances and general
stability of our municipalities. Our duty is therefore one
of national conservation. We not only want to conserve
resources in the rural districts, but also in the cities which
are growing up in Canada. You know we have about half
of our people living in cities and towns.

We have passed a compulsory town planning act for
Nova Scotia, and the whole province of Nova Scotia must
be town planned within three years, according to that act.
In Alberta there is a permissive act. In Saskatchewan
there is a proposal to introduce a compulsory town planning
act by the Hon. Mr. Langley, who spoke at the last Con-
ference.

The cities and towns are asking for compulsory legisla-
tion. Only two or three days ago I attended a conference
in southwestern Ontario where there were 20 cities rep-
resented. They unanimously passed a resolution calling
upon the Ontario legislature to compel them to town plan.
That is the right order in which to proceed.

Compulsion brought from the top on a democratic peo-
ple will never succeed, but where the people recognize the

[164]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

need for controlling the excesses of liberty and themselves
suggest means to do so, success is certain.

We are succeeding in Canada and going even farther
than they are in England. In so far as we have settled
principles definitely fixed in our minds we are making it
compulsory planning, and in so far as we cannot do so
we are leaving it optional.

I should like to explain briefly what is compulsory and
what is optional. The compulsory provisions are that
every authority, whether municipality, rural municipality,
town or city, shall create a local town planning board.
That is the first compulsory section. The second is that
every subdivision which is hereafter made shall be sub-
mitted to and approved by that local board when it is
created. The third provision is that the local board must
within three years prepare a set of town planning by-laws
or a town planning scheme. The town planning by-laws
must lay down certain minimum provisions and conditions.
For instance, in Nova Scotia no building can be erected
nearer to another, on opposite sides of a street, than 80
feet if it is a main thoroughfare. They must also prepare
a by-law governing the limitation of the houses to the acre.
The question of whether any area shall be specially set
aside for factories and whether any area shall be set aside
for shopping or some other purpose must be covered in
those by-laws.

Now town planning has to be social as well as archi-
tectural. It has also to have a sound financial basis. And
I venture to say that when these matters are considered
at the outset it will be found that our scheme will conform
to the ideas advanced by Dr. Whitten and others that a
scheme has to provide for growth. We must make provi-
sion for alterations as we go along, but we must fix only
those things as definite which can be fixed now either by
agreement with owners or at the public expense after due
consideration of the cost, otherwise our whole planning will
be unsuccessful.

[165]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

And finally, do not let us leave the lawyer out of the
town planning at the beginning of our schemes. A town
planning scheme in England is an act of Parliament and
the plan is illustrative of the act. Unless you get legal
powers first, you are in this position — that the more per-
fect your plan, the less certain is it that you can carry it
out, except at an unreasonable expense, because you have
given your case away by preparing the plan. Those who
are in a position to defeat your scheme have the knowledge
which enables them to do it if they wish to defeat it.

I hope that in opening this discussion I have raised some
points that will bring out other views.

A. L. Brockway, Chairman City Plan Commission,
Syracuse:
We have in Syracuse today a commission which is in its
second year of official existence and previous to its ap-
pointment we had a committee of the chamber of commerce
which worked on city planning for about three years. The
plan commission is created by the authority of a general
enabling act passed by the legislature of New York, which
makes the appointment of such commissions permissive.
From several years' experience, both with the committee of
the chamber and with the plan commission, we have learned
first that the type of city government must determine spe-
cifically what the functions of the city planning authority
in any city shall be, and, second, that plan commissions
should have definite and final authority in some matters at
least. Whether that authority shall be given in the form of
a veto power or whether the general departments of the
city government shall be reorganized are matters which
need to have further study. While I appreciate that this
discussion must necessarily deal with generalities, I am
sure that these generalities can only be arrived at through
the study of specific instances and I shall cite some from
our experience.

We tried by state law to govern housing conditions in

[ 166 ]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

cities of the second class. The law was in existence for one
year, and raised a howl from one end of the state to the
other. It was repealed at the next session of the legisla-
ture with the recommendation by the legislative committee
that each city should adopt a housing act suited to its own
peculiar requirements. I refer to this act as showing the
difficulty of using mandatory or even permissive legislation.

Not until the man on the street becomes impressed with
a higher respect for law than the average man in his coun-
try shall we make the advance in city planning that we
expect to. The autocracy of the imperial German govern-
ment is a tremendous asset, and the respect for law on the
part of the citizen of Germany and England, particularly
in England where the government is really more democratic
than in this country, is the thing that makes success pos-
sible. The great stumbling block in our country which
both Mr. Williams and Mr. Adams have pointed out is the
question of private property, the fundamental rights of the
private individual. It is a very fair definition of a city
that it is a place to do business in, to live in, and to get
from your home to your business and do it pleasantly and
comfortably. Now if the individual is going to insist upon
his own rights it will be very difficult to secure the unity of
interest which is essential to the best growth of the city.

Syracuse is operated under a charter common to all sec-
ond class cities in New York. The common council made
up of one representative from each ward is the legislative
authority. The administrative officers are the five mem-
bers of the Board of Estimates and Apportionment, con-
sisting of the mayor, corporation counsel, comptroller, city
engineer and president of the council. In the course of
organization of the departments considerable control over
the physical growth of the city is given to the department
of public works and much authority is conferred upon the
city engineer and the commissioner of public works who are
both members of this department. The result is often that
street openings, street extensions and street improvements

[167]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

are made in accordance with no definite comprehensive plan,
but merely follow the whim of this man or that.

Now we believe that the city planning authority is ex-
actly as important as the department of public works or
the department of health. We believe that such a de-
partment is necessary to prevent deformities in the addition
of outlying districts already existing and to prevent de-
formities in the arrangement and rearrangement of the
rapid transit system. As in New York state where 169
departments and commissions, overlapping but in no way
coordinating, are responsible for administration, so in a
city like Syracuse there is no one definite head to determine
the business policy of the city. We believe that the work of
the city engineer, of the commissioner of public works, of
the park commission and a special commission called the
grade crossing commission, might well be grouped together
to perform a part of the work of the city planning depart-
ment. To illustrate: We have a very serious grade cross-
ing problem in Syracuse; the New York Central crosses
the entire east and west ends of the town at grade. The
legislature passed an act creating a special commission and
gave the commission the power, subject to the approval of
the Board of Estimates and Apportionment of Syracuse,
to issue bonds for the purpose of obligating the city for
its portion of the expense in connection with elimination of
the grade crossing. You can see that nothing could be
more important to Syracuse than the solution of the grade
crossing problem in accordance with a comprehensive plan,
yet there has been no cooperation between the grade cross-
ing commission and the city planning commission. About
a year ago the grade crossing commission contributed for
an exhibit in New York City a tentative study which the
city planning commission had made, but no credit was given
to the city planning commission. I cite this as a reason
to justify my stand that until a city planning authority is
vested with some actual authority either by a veto power,
or by representation on the Board of Estimates and Ap-

[168]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

portionment, we cannot expect the members of common
councils or the average citizen to have the respect for a
city planning authority which they should have.

In connection with the drainage and canal system of the
state the New York legislature has made provision for a
terminal in Syracuse. After several years' study, a plan
which was worked out by a committee of the chamber of
commerce and the Technology Club was finally adopted by
the Canal Board and 95 per cent of the opinion of Syracuse
was focused upon the location suggested for a terminal.
The state engineer was to go ahead with its construction,
but year after year went by and nothing was done. The
city plan commission did what it could in the matter, but
being entirely advisory it was like a fly buzzing around the
state engineer, and he paid very little attention to it.

Last January a change of administration brought in a
Republican state engineer. The question as to the location
of the terminal appeared again for public discussion. An
entire elimination of all the previous plans, of all the
studies for location of industries of the city and for the
possibility of development of great industrial areas, — all
these were thrown to the winds. After a few spasmodic
efforts a conference was held. The representative of the
New York Central was there and the mayor and his city
engineer and one or two members of the grade crossing
commission, and at this conference was presented a new
plan by the new state engineer which entirely disregarded
all previous studies. The city planning commission was not
considered of particular importance in the deliberation be-
cause the chief engineer of the New York Central and the
state engineer said if the question were opened to the public
it would throw the whole thing in the air and delay it so
long that the terminal might be lost entirely. If the city
planning authority in Syracuse had been vested with a veto
power as it is in the matter of new subdivisions both within
the city and outside of the city, a good deal might have been
accomplished.

[169]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

We are having a state convention in New York these days
for the purpose of revising the constitution, a thing that
occurs about once in twenty years. I believe there is going
to be a pretty radical reorganization of the govern-
mental departments of the state. I believe there will be a
provision which will allow cities to organize their govern-
ment according to their own requirements, and that that
form of government will include some recognition of the
fact that city planning is today standing up and ready to
walk, and that means will be provided for it to walk with
a steady tread in the right direction.

Austen H. McGregor, President City Plan Commis-
sion, Newark, N. J.:

From inception the city planning agency and all con-
nected with it are usually on the defensive, either because
the public lacks knowledge or understanding of its purpose
or because the public is unable, either in fact or in idea, to
divorce city planning from politics. It is difficult but im-
portant to dispel these two clouds of doubt and suspicion.

To remove the lack of knowledge or misunderstanding is
the easier task. The plan must be practical. It must be
so clearly formulated as to be easily intelligible and not
open to petty criticism, and its features should be made
widely known by an able publicity campaign. To convince
the citizen public that the city plan has to do with the
physical rather than the political future welfare of the
city is not so easy a task. Its accomplishment depends
greatly upon the character of the city planning agency,
upon the personal qualities of the members and their gen-
eral attitude toward civic problems. Furthermore it must
be self-evident to the citizens that some plan is a vital
necessity, that this plan is founded upon facts which have
been thoroughly studied rather than upon a superficial
knowledge of general conditions and, lastly, that the ends
at which the plan aims justify the means of accomplish-
ment. Thus to show that the plan is an imperative part

[170]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of the city structure rather than a panacea for all municipal
ills is to make for eventual success.

Creation of City Planning Agency

There should be in every state an act of the legislature
making mandatory the creation of city planning agencies.
This means widespread activity with broad results. To
make the creation of the city planning agency permissive
means, in many instances, a lack of response, chiefly be-
cause of lethargy or ignorance of the subject's vital
importance.

Organization of City Planning Agency

The city planning agency should consist of not less than
five nor more than seven members in cities having a popu-
lation of 100,000 and of three to five members in cities and
towns under 100,000. For effective work it is essential
to have a small board. If a larger membership is desired,
citizens and officials may be added as advisory members
only.

An agency of five members could well consist of the city
engineer; one other representative city official, for instance
a member of the board of estimate, common council, city
commission or similar body ; and three citizens of the high-
est repute, preferably a representative business man, a
physician and an architect or lawyer. Much depends upon
the personal character of these men; the decisions of the
board will carry much more weight if they are free from
suspicion of political bias.

City planning demands expert administration. There
should be at the command of the board expert advisers hav-
ing wide experience in engineering, in architecture and in
publicity, and the office force, according to the size of the
municipality and the character of its problems, should be
trained to render the necessary services along these three
lines.

[171]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Powers of City Planning Agency

The powers of a city planning agency can be considered
under two headings: (1) those which are mandatory, sub-
ject to the veto of the executive governing body; (2) those
which are purely recommendatory. Since the city planning
agency is usually appointive it would be contrary to the
principles of good government to vest it with absolute
power, yet the power to investigate and report only is
insufficient and tends to belittle the value of its work. The
supervision of the design and regulation of all public build-
ings, bridges, statues, etc., and of land subdivisions could
well be placed in the control of the city planning agency,
subject to the veto of the executive governing body.

Among the other powers and duties concerning which it
should have authority to recommend only should be any
public or quasi-public improvement having to do with the
physical development of the city. This would include
everything to be contained in the comprehensive plan as,
for instance: (a) street system; (o) parks, playgrounds
and recreation system; (c) transit and transportation; (d)
rail and water terminals; (e) markets; (/) districting of
city for the purpose of regulating height, area and use of
buildings; (g) housing; (h) official city map (unless already
provided by other city department).

There will be a varying degree of work to be done under
each of the above subjects according to the specific prob-
lems of each community and the degree to which the munici-
pality has progressed along these lines. And the desir-
ability of having a body free from political or other bias
which can freely express opinions on these problems is ap-
parent, although such a device is unusual.

Program of Procedure

The first thing to do is to form the city planning agency
and put it on a working basis. After that two things must
be done simultaneously.

[172]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

There should be a publicity campaign. It is almost im-
possible to put too much emphasis upon publicity, for
upon the degree to which the citizen public appreciates the
necessity for a well defined policy of public improvement
depends the manner in which the plan will be received and
adopted.

And there should be a collection of data. An intelligent
plan can be prepared only after obtaining an intimate
knowledge of actual conditions. Such knowledge depends
upon the collection of the proper data.

These two activities can be made to aid each other. As
the knowledge of various phases of the subject is obtained
it is advisable to publish, from time to time, separate re-
ports which will supplement the work in publicity and
gradually acquaint the public with the conditions en-
countered, so that when the time comes for the next step
there will be an enlightened public opinion prepared to
judge of its value in view of the facts.

This next step is the presentation of a tentative plan.
Properly prepared for by previous reports, this can be
intelligently discussed. Had the publicity work not been
done, the immediate effect of this plan would have been too
staggering for complete comprehension.

Included in the data minutely studied in the preparation
of the plan would be the financial condition of the munici-
pality, and this first plan would roughly provide for the
financial transactions necessary for its fulfilment.

When the tentative plan has been canvassed and revised,
the final plan should be prepared and presented in the form
of a program of procedure whereby the whole may be com-
pleted within a given period. This would anticipate a
certain amount of work to be accomplished during each
year and would be accompanied by a detailed program of
the financial transactions incident to the accomplishment of
the completed plan.

To conclude, it has been the aim of the speaker to present
such answers to the questionnaire received from the com-

[173]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

mittee in charge of this work as have suggested themselves
with particular reference to the experience of the Newark
City Plan Commission. As in all work it is impossible
to accomplish desirable things without here and there an
occasional error, I do not hold the Newark City Plan Com-
mission up to you as a model of virtue. I do say this,
however: if city planning agencies can convince the citizen
public that the improvements which they know are desirable
can more properly be obtained in a practical and systematic
manner, which is most heartily our aim in Newark, and
furthermore, if these agencies can assist such accomplish-
ment, their usefulness can never be questioned, and hence
the American municipality will know less of chaos, ineffi-
ciency and politics and more of dignity and amenity.

Alfred Bettman, Esq., Cmcvrmati, Ohio:

Dr. Whitten and Mr. Adams have raised an issue, and a
very interesting issue, as to whether or not city planning
activities should be imposed on a municipality or voluntarily
assumed by it, and whether the execution of city plan-
ning activity shall repose exclusively in municipal author-
ities or partly in municipal and partly in state and national
authorities; and of course each of the contestants feels
that he has given the correct and only correct formula in
the matter.

I believe the truth is that in this, as in all other political
questions, there is no system or device which is always and
necessarily the right one for all communities at all times
or even at all times for any particular community, but that
the situation in any particular city or state or nation at
a particular time is the result of an historical development
which has produced certain particular evils or defects at
that time, and these need a particular remedy ; whereas an-
other community with a different situation due to a different
historical action or development suffers from evils which
demand some other remedy.

Now whatever may be true of England or Canada, in
[174]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

certain portions of the United States at least a very full
measure of home rule, a very full measure of municipal free-
dom from state control is, at this particular time and in
the particular situation in which the developed American
communities now find themselves, necessary to eradicate
existing defects.

To be a little more concrete, I will take my own state of
Ohio, in which conditions may differ from those of other
states, but whose conditions I may discuss freely without
danger of discourtesy to other communities.

It is a highly developed industrial community with many
large cities presenting peculiarly American municipal prob-
lems. At the same time, however, its state government has
a rather rural point of view or attitude. That is an his-
torical development, due to the fact that Ohio was for so
long a time a highly developed agricultural state, and its
state institutions were modeled upon the past predominat-
ing agricultural conditions. Although the cities contain a
majority of population, the rural communities control a
majority of the state legislature, by means of a very unique
and apparently unbreakable provision of the state constitu-
tion. State officers, accustomed to more rural conditions,
are constantly shocked over the amounts of money expended
by municipalities and seek to devise means of restricting
municipal activities. Without going into too much detail,
it may be said that there has developed in state administra-
tions a rather rural point of view toward city problems, a
failure to be conscious of the intensity and importance of
those city problems and of the necessity of correcting the
evils of city life by strong and generally expensive commu-
nity action. In such a situation it is necessary for the cities
to free themselves, to educate themselves as to what is neces-
sary to the development of better conditions in cities. Pos-
sibly when a stage has been reached at which the cities shall
have freed themselves, shall have devised a machinery for
self-education and self-development in city planning mat-
ters, perhaps when that situation is reached, certain new

[175]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

defects or evils will also have developed as a by-product
of the home rule enjoyed by the cities, and it may be that
these evils will in future need correction by state action.
But in just the present situation in a state like Ohio, where
large industrial cities have grown rapidly, but still the
communities are old enough and settled long enough to
have developed numerous and' powerful private property
interests — which distinguishes them from the conditions
in the Canadian West, for instance, where the private prop-
erty interests are not so complex and numerous and highly
developed — in such a situation as that in which Ohio
cities find themselves, a very large measure of home rule
is absolutely essential, and each city must itself learn to
want city planning and itself have the determination of
whether there shall be city planning and what sort and how
much.

With that point of view we have just written, and the
Ohio legislature has just passed, a city planning act, the
first piece of city planning legislation in the state of Ohio
other than city planning sections of a few municipal char-
ters. This statute contains a mixture of voluntary and
involuntary features and really turns out to be quite along
the line of Dr. Whitten's recommendations. It provides
that any city may decide for itself whether it wants a city
planning commission. Once it has decided upon a city
planning commission, that commission's work and that com-
mission's plans have some legal force. In order to get con-
tinuity, more continuity than would result from a change
of personnel in the commission every two years as we change
the personnel of our city administration, the term of com-
missioners has been made six years. The customary device
of a mixture of official and citizen members of commission
has been followed.

Until the planning commission shall have developed a
complete plan of the city, it has no powers other than ad-
visory powers. Once, however, it has formed its plan, then
the commission will become practically a department of the

[H6]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

city government; for from that time its consent is neces-
sary to the location of any public improvement or public
utility, unless its refusal to consent is overridden by two-
thirds of the city legislative department, together with that
part of the city administration which is in charge of the
construction of the peculiar kind of improvement that is
under discussion. So that it really becomes, practically
speaking, a department of the city government whose con-
sent is necessary to the location of all structures affecting
the public, unless there is an overwhelming contrary opin-
ion on the part of the executive and legislative departments
of the city.

Now we believe that legislation corresponds to the par-
ticular situation of Ohio municipalities today. It may not
fit a situation such as Western Canada, where new cities
are just being built. It would perhaps not be a logical
piece of legislation in Great Britain, where the imperial
legislature meets in the midst of the most intensive urban
environment in the whole country and represents or at
least is largely permeated with an urban point of view.
But in the situation which exists in all the older portions
of the United States, such a piece of legislation at least
answers the present development and enables some prog-
ress in city planning. And that progress will disclose what
further steps shall prove to be necessary in order to deal
adequately with the particular future conflicts and prob-
lems that municipal life and growth may produce.

Mr. Frederick Law Olmsted, Boston:

Dr. Whitten made clear the reasons why it is necessary
for the sake of administrative efficiency and unification that
the final responsibility in city planning should rest upon
the central governing body of the city. Mr. Brockway,
from a slightly different point of view, made the same point
clear. This may be effected in various ways: either by
making the city planning office a subordinate bureau of the
central administrative authority, or with a quasi-independ-

[177]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ent city planning commission by giving them merely a
suspensory veto over the decisions of the central adminis-
trative authority.

On the other hand it was pointed out that there is diffi-
culty in maintaining that continuity of purpose which is
so vitally important in city planning if the final respon-
sibility thus rests upon a municipal authority subject to
frequent changes of personnel, changes which depend upon
political considerations that are not usually connected with
any question of city plan policy. A new administration,
elected upon an issue which has nothing to do with city
planning, may hastily overturn a policy deliberately estab-
lished and long maintained by the city planning office with
the approval of preceding administrations.

When a plan is once officially adopted as the city plan,
when a certain policy is developed by the city plan office
and adopted by the responsible city government after due
deliberation, there should be, for the sake of continuity and
steadiness of purpose, some check upon its too easy over-
turn, without impairing the subordination of the city
planning office to the responsible city government. One
method would be to require that such an overturn of policy
or change of an adopted plan must receive the approval of
some independent authority quite external to the munici-
pality, corresponding to the Local Government Board in
Great Britain or the state officials who act in Germany as
a board of appeal in regard to changes in established city
plans.

Having spoken of this desirable form of negative control
over local city planning by state authorities, let me add a
word about positive control.

Mr. Brockway spoke of the difficulty of imposing on our
cities uniform state regulations for the control of city
planning. He cited the case of the New York state housing
law against which there was a reaction because it was
thought by the cities that it imposed too much regulation
upon them from above, and he seemed to suggest the alterna-

[178]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

tive of a complete home rule in such matters, leaving action
wholly to local initiative. In that connection it is interest-
ing to cite what Mr. Adams pointed out as taking place
in Canada, where all of the municipalities of a certain
province have had a few fundamental standards in city
planning fixed for them from above, but aside from these
standards have been given as much latitude as possible in
adjusting their planning to local needs and preferences.
In Massachusetts a state-wide building law has been framed
which, under most of its headings, gives a wide range of
local option to the towns and cities of the state in fixing
the standards to be required of builders, but which includes
certain mandatory requirements applicable throughout the
state, such as permissible loads upon a given type of beam
for example. Standards not dependent on local conditions
are then fixed by the state, and for the sake of convenience
in the use of the various local codes uniform methods of
statement for the definition of certain other standards are
prescribed by the state, although the filling in of the blanks
with actual figures is left for local decision. Is this not
the way to proceed in framing city planning laws?

Mr. M. N. Baker, New York:

I am interested in this subject at all times, and particu-
larly so just now because I have been asked, as a member
of the Municipal Program Committee of the National Mu-
nicipal League, to draw a very brief city planning section
of a model city charter. The problem is to embody in the
small compass of a section of a short charter something
which will be sufficiently broad and elastic to fit cities large
and small throughout the whole country.

It seems imperative to have the city planning authority
thoroughly coordinated with the other branches of the
city government and subordinate to the city council or
commission.

To secure this coordination the city engineer should be
a member of the city planning commission, possibly also

[179]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the director or commissioner of public works, and since
there is so close a relation between health and city planning,
there is reason for having the administrative health officer
a member of the city planning commission. Finally, I wish
to invite this conference to cooperate with the National
Municipal League committee in its attempt to draft a
city planning section of a model city charter.

Mr. Marshall R. Pugh, Philadelphia:

Mr. Baker has spoken of the work that the National
Municipal League is doing in regard to framing a general
city charter. This league may possibly give help and
light to some of us who are struggling in very considerable
gloom over the problems involved where city planning and
suburban planning touch each other — that species of twi-
light zone which surrounds the city, neither city nor coun-
try, the commuting district.

I think we are too apt to forget the fact that a modern
city differs from the old-time city not merely in degree, but
in kind. Carlyle speaks of Fortunatus and his wishing hat,
which, when he clapped it on his head and wished he were
anywhere, behold! he was there. Modern transportation
has practically put us in the position of Fortunatus. It
has utterly changed the whole development of cities and
their character of growth.

In a metropolitan community there is a central section,
the city proper. Radiating from this along the various
transportation lines, like spokes of a wheel, are densely
populated strips and clusters of suburban villages. Be-
tween these lie farms and frequently more or less rugged
hills and valleys unsuitable for urban development, which
will for a long period of time remain rural.

The territory surrounding Philadelphia furnishes a typi-
cal example. The zone under the jurisdiction of the Subur-
ban Metropolitan Planning Commission comprises 200
towns, townships, boroughs and cities — 200 district po-
litical entities, all of them working more or less at cross

[180]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

purposes. Along one of the radial strips just mentioned
are some 20 towns side by side, some of them completely
surrounded by others. So closely are they crowded to-
gether that their problems of sewage disposal are incapable
of solution by any one of them. Coordinated action is
essential, but they have been attempting to get this for the
past eight or ten years and seem no nearer to the goal than
they were at the start. Highways and numerous other
questions are also involved.

Yet we must not lose sight of the fact that local self-
government is important, and town planning is but one of
a number of desirable things. In our zeal, while we may
not overestimate its importance, we are apt to underrate
other matters of grave consequence.

In Pennsylvania we are confronted with constitutional
difficulties, which I apprehend would be the case in a num-
ber of other states as well.

One of these troubles is to find a constitutional method
of raising funds. Another obstacle encountered is the diffi-
culty of inducing the various local authorities to work to-
gether, so that comprehensive action can be taken, and the
apparent impossibility of legally applying a certain degree
of compulsion, which would seem to be necessary to achieve
any marked results.

Mr. T. S. Morris, Hamilton, Out. :

I would like to ask whether in the composition of the city
planning board it is better to have the majority of the
board composed of city officials or of representative citi-
zens. I would like to have Dr. Whitten answer that ques-
tion if he will be good enough.

Dr. Whitten:

Whether, in the case of a city planning commission made
up partly of official and partly of non-official members, the
majority representation should be given to the official or
to the non-official members may depend a great deal upon

[181]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the particular city. I have said that in organizing a city
planning authority existing officials should be used so far
as practicable. The proportion of official members will
therefore vary in different cities. Only a few of those who
answered the questionnaire stated any preference in regard
to this particular matter, but those few stated that they
believed that the non-official members should constitute a
majority of the commission.

Ma joe Joseph W. Shieley, Baltimore:

One question that seems to be troubling most cities, as
brought out in this morning's discussion, is: What should
constitute the personnel of a commission on city plan?
This seems to be a question on which there may be an honest
difference of opinion and, I am sure, will not be settled at
this Conference and probably not at the next Conference.
While this question is being discussed the cities of the
country are growing, some of them very rapidly, and I
cannot help saying a word or two on what can be done in
connection with a city plan while this question of the com-
mission is being thrashed out.

No time should be lost by any city in working out a plan.
Until some careful supervision is given to what is going on
in the sections now being developed, much correction will
be necessary after we have obtained what we might think to
be a model method of working out a city plan.

There are several points that I might mention which we
have found to be very useful in Baltimore and which may
help many cities likewise. About twenty-three years ago
Baltimore annexed quite an area to its limits and realized
that the best way to know just what it had acquired was to
obtain a complete topographical survey and map of this
territory. This Baltimore did by making a liberal appro-
priation, and the results obtained, I am sure, justified the
expenditure.

Every city, before it is able to study properly the terri-
tory to be developed, should have a complete topographical

[182]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

map. This it takes time to make and, therefore, should be
begun as soon as possible, in order to have it completed
by the time the commission necessary to carrying out a plan
is ready.

Upon the completion of Baltimore's topographical map
the Topographical Survey Commission, the department
which had prepared the map, was directed by the mayor
and city council to prepare a street plan covering the area
lately acquired, and after studying the situation a tentative
plan was adopted by the city. In order to carry out this
plan of streets the city of Baltimore called upon the state
legislature to pass an act which was substantially as fol-
lows — that no street or avenue could be condemned or
opened nor could the city accept the deed or dedication of
any street or avenue unless the same conformed with the
general plan of streets which had been adopted or was in
accordance with an amendment to the general plan. An
amendment to the plan could only be made by the joint ap-
proval of the Topographical Survey Commission and the
mayor and city council. This act was passed by the legis-
lature and has been in force for a number of years. It has
served the city very well in carrying out the street plan.
Smooth sailing has not always been the case, but in all
controversies the city has accomplished what it feels was
satisfactory.

The carrying out of this street plan necessarily keeps the
city in close touch with the land developer, who soon under-
stands that should he lay out a street on his own property,
which of course he has a right to do, unless the location of
that street conforms to the city's plan, it must be main-
tained by him as a private street. This being the case, he
stops to think before doing so, to determine whether it is
not better for him to have the city's endorsement of his
plan, with an opportunity to turn over to the city his street
bed as a public street, than to maintain for the balance of
time a private street, which, of necessity, will be a source of
expense and trouble to him. The purchaser of the proper-

[183]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ties bordering along this street also prefers being on a
street which is cared for by the city rather than on one
cared for by a private individual.

We have found that these conferences with the real estate
developers have been mutually beneficial, and we believe that
the city of Baltimore, through its Topographical Survey
Commission, has gained the confidence of most land de-
velopers and that the results obtained by frequent consulta-
tions have been very satisfactory.

It is to these three points that I wish to call the atten-
tion of the members of the conference, for I feel sure that
with action along this line much may be accomplished.

Mr. Morris:

May I ask who you mean by " we " ? You say " we "
can do so and so. " We " can accomplish so and so. Who
do you mean by " we "? I mean before the commission is
formed.

Major Shirley:

I will explain in this way : by referring to " we " I mean
the Topographical Survey Commission, which, as stated
above, was the commission formed to prepare the map and
to which, after the map was completed, powers were dele-
gated to prepare a street plan and to supervise the carry-
ing of it out. This commission is composed of the mayor,
the city comptroller and the city register, who employ a
chief engineer and the necessary force for making surveys,
plans, etc. The personnel of this commission changes of
course with the different administrations.

Mr. John Nolen, Cambridge:

I want to give a word of endorsement to what seems to
me to be the advantages of a mandatory law as against a
permissive law in the case of city plan commissions. Of
course if we can get the cities, as Mr. Adams suggested,
demanding this mandatory law, it is without question very

[184]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

much more effective. But in watching things in Massachu-
setts in the last five or six years, I have been very much
impressed with the lack of initiative on the part of the
cities, as compared with what happened when some require-
ment or direct stimulus came from the state. It was shown
in the case of the playground referendum which the state
law forced on the cities. We found, before that law was
passed, that cities were doing comparatively little in the
way of the playground movement. The law simply re-
quired that cities and towns should put the referendum to
the vote of the people; as soon as it was put to the vote
of the people it was passed by all except two of the cities
and towns of the state which were required to act upon it.
As the result a great many playgrounds were established.
In other words, apparently this force did not express itself
in cities and towns without the state law. We have seen
something of the same sort with regard to housing both in
towns and cities.

Now we have the city planning mandatory law in Massa-
chusetts. Take a city like Cambridge, which I think would
not have established a city planning commission on its own
initiative, and did it under the state law in a reluctant
and perfunctory way. Now Cambridge is getting genuinely
interested in the subject because it has discovered that city
planning is something rather different from what is was
believed to be.

With regard to another point : the question of the veto
power of planning boards or the method of sustaining
action by the planning board as against the city govern-
ment. The Metropolitan (Boston) Planning Commission
which worked out a proposed law held a good many public
hearings in order to get the views on this question of the
38 towns and cities round about Boston, asking them what
should be the action, in case a planning board were created,
in enforcing a decision. I think I am right in my recollec-
tion that the majority view was that the result could best
be obtained by what was called a suspensive veto; that is,

[185]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

if any action were taken contrary to a proposed plan or
project, the planning board, in this case Metropolitan —
the principle, however, is the same — would have the right
to compel a suspension of action for a given period. Six
months was suggested and a year was suggested. This
came as a suggestion from the people who were going to
suffer or be restrained, so the planning board finally ac-
cepted it as a form satisfactory to the local bodies.

From observation of city planning in Massachusetts and
in Pennsylvania I have come to believe in the state authority
and feel strongly the advantage of a central state body
helping more than controlling the local bodies. The Massa-
chusetts Homestead Commission has more than justified
its existence.

If I may, I should like to ask two questions of Dr.
Whitten. In the subject of the art jury, the proposed
separation of the art jury from a local planning board in
which there are great advantages, I was wondering how
you could work out the functions so that the art jury would
be distinct from the planning board, in the case, for ex-
ample, of what it was good to do in the location of build-
ings in a civic center or in the matter of a design of a
park. In other words, that I may make myself clear,
should such decision be left to the action of the art jury,
assuming both bodies exist, or to the planning board?
Where should the line be drawn? What should be recog-
nized as art judgment and what as planning judgment?

The other question is whether there was any evidence in
the returns from the committee's questionnaire to help in
judging whether under the city commission form of govern-
ment, in the case of a small city (I mean a city of 100,000
people or under), whether the city commission, giving all
its time to city government, would form an effective city
planning commission itself. That is what is happening
in Sacramento today. Sacramento has a city govern-
ment with a city commission of five men, which has con-
stituted itself the city planning authority and is work-

[186]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ing with great smoothness and success in getting plans
made and in carrying out promptly everything approved.

Db. Whitten:

First, as to the question of the differentiation of powers
of the art jury and the city planning commission in the
case of (1) a design of a park and (2) the location of
public buildings. The art jury should have no control
over the design of a park. A park design should be con-
trolled by the park commissioner, subject to approval as
to certain features by the city plan authority. In the case
of the location of public buildings the question of differ-
entiation of powers is more difficult. The city plan au-
thority should have control over the location of a public
building. The art commission should have control over
the design of the building and its immediate setting or
environment.

As regards the commission form of government and a
city planning commission, I have no definite information,
but my impression would be that in a small city having
the commission form of government the commission could
act as an effective city planning authority.

The question raised in regard to compensation for build-
ings within the street lines is very important. The diverse
experience of Pennsylvania and New York in this matter
is interesting. In New York City for a long time the law
provided there should be no compensation for buildings
erected within the lines of the street subsequent to the
mapping of the street. The New York court upheld this
method. Subsequently, however, a new constitution was
adopted with the usual guaranties of property rights. A
new case came before the courts, and under the guaranties
contained in the new constitution the disallowance of
damages for buildings within the street lines was held to be
invalid. It is interesting to note that the Pennsylvania de-
cision upholding the power to deny compensation for build-
ings within street lines refers to the first New York case

[187]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

as an authority on this subject, but makes no reference to
the subsequent New York case which reversed the former
policy. I wish Mr. Thomas Adams were here so that he
could inform us how this particular matter is treated in
carrying out the Town Planning Act of Great Britain. It
seems to me that some extension of our city planning powers
so as to include a procedure similar to that of the English
Town Planning Act is necessary in order to secure adher-
ence to the street lines laid down by the city plan.

Mr. Adams has raised the question of a tentative plan
versus a final plan. It is admitted by all, however, that
in the case of a great city it is necessary to start with
a tentative plan for the entire metropolitan district. The
complete final plan for a great city cannot be adopted at
any one time. It must be taken up, considered and adopted
in sections. Before the final plan for any particular sec-
tion is adopted there should, however, be a tentative com-
prehensive plan for the entire area; otherwise there can
be no correlation between the different sections.

Mr. Baker has brought to our attention the important
work of the National Municipal League in drafting a
municipal program and including as a part thereof a sec-
tion on city planning. I believe that the Committee on
Administrative Procedure of this Conference could very well
cooperate with Mr. Baker in this important work. The
Committee on Administrative Procedure should, I think,
follow up the work begun at this session with a definite
formulation of a comprehensive legislative program for
city planning.

Mr. Joseph Johnson, Philadelphia:

I have first in mind the question of the comprehensive
plan. A comprehensive plan was suggested for Philadel-
phia, and in the southern part of the city has been worked
out and a portion has been confirmed, and we are now
waiting to see what is going to come out of it. We are
actually on trial at the present time. We have had great

[188]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

opposition to it, and the balance of the plan in that section
is now up for confirmation with great opposition. We do
not know what will happen.

In relation to our parkway from the City Hall to Fair-
mount Park, the question was raised as to the immediate
taking of the property, and because the courts would not
allow this they went to the legislature and attempted to
have the whole planning system of the city of Philadelphia
wiped out, and wiped out immediately. We had to go to the
legislature and fight it, and we won out with some little
compromise and with a bill that is now before the governor
for his signature, which covers parks and parkways as to
their taking in the central portion of the city. We still
retain our plans as to the street system in the city of
Philadelphia, and we can continue to adopt them and add
to them.

Also, I wanted to speak about the placing of intermediate
streets upon the plan. We have the right to place addi-
tional streets upon the plan (intermediate streets). We
do place the intermediate streets on the city plan and are
rather liberal in our views. We have to be a little liberal
to the builder and we have to cater to him to a certain ex-
tent. He is the man who is investing his money. There-
fore we do not get all of our intermediate streets as we
would like to have them. It is a source of a great deal of
annoyance and trouble in the city, but we are getting a
little more stringent in our rules as to placing these streets,
on account of the size of the lot. There has been consider-
able contention in our board, particularly of late years, a
number of members contending that lots should be at least
50 feet in depth.

Our board also has the right to place parks upon the
city plan upon receiving authority from council. We
place streets on the city plan and confirm them, and the
owner waits until such time as the city is financially able
to pay for them or they are dedicated.

[189]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Mr. J. C. Murphy, Louisville:

There has been a good deal said here about independent
commissions. I would like to call your attention to the
system that prevails in Louisville. We have the ordinary
city government composed of the mayor, aldermen and
councilmen, but when any large work is undertaken an in-
dependent commission is appointed for that work. We
have also continuous commissions, one for governing our
parks, another for our libraries. In order to get contin-
uity in the work of these commissions they are generally
composed of four men, one appointed each year for a four
year term. The mayor is ex officio a member of each of
these commissions and has only as much power as any other
commissioner and of course no power of veto. He has only
the power of voting in case of a tie. Also, to control those
commissions, the funds that are supplied to them for car-
rying on their work is voted by the council. The council
in that way controls them, but they act independently in
all other respects.

Another point that was raised that I may call attention
to. We have a state law which gives the city power over
a district within three miles of the city limits for the pur-
pose of platting. The city has a veto power in case the
district lies inside of the city limits, the power being exer-
cised by the board of public works. But in districts that
are outside of the city but within the three mile limit the
veto power is jointly in our board of public works and
the judge of our county court, which is the governing body
of the district in the county that is outside of the city
limits.

No plat can be recorded in our court of record without
having received the approval, when it lies inside of the city,
of the board of public works ; when outside of the city, the
board of public works and the county judge jointly.

Mr. Louis Lott, Dayton, Ohio

In regard to the city commission taking over the func-
tions of the city planning board. As far as I know

[190]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

our own city commissioners of Dayton, I have heard
their tales of woe from time to time, they are so overbur-
dened with work; and you must remember that these are
private business men and devote only a part of their time,
and at that a very great part of it for a very small com-
pensation. I am sure I speak for them; if the duty of a
town planning board was imposed upon them, they would
certainly object. My own opinion about the city planning
board is that it would be to the best advantage of all con-
cerned to get the best material, either officially or unof-
ficially, that you happen to have in a city, and as few com-
missioners as possible to make the thing work right and
properly.

Mr. A. A. Stoughton, WiTmipeg:

As to the composition of commissions, it may be interest-
ing to know what has been done in Winnipeg. There the
commission is composed entirely of men outside of the official
circle, except that the city surveyor is a member. Being
the custodian of all of the maps and records, it is very con-
venient to refer to him, and the meetings are held in his
office ; the members are thus in close touch with the physical
plan of the city. The members are chosen for their pro-
fessions — an engineer, an architect, a real estate man, the
president of the Town Planning Association, a former
mayor and the city surveyor. The idea is, I think, that
any of the city officials is too busy to put his mind on the
details of a " plan," although they are always welcome at the
meetings. The members of the commission, except the city
surveyor, have as their sole municipal function the study
and furtherance of the city plan. They keep in close touch
with the city officials and go to them constantly, and the
latter know what is being done, and the most cordial re-
lations obtain between the commission and the Board of
Control and Council and the mayor and others composing
our city administration. The commission has no authority ;
it simply is an advisory body, but it is gradually develop-

[191]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ing a comprehensive plan and is taking up one feature after
another, working it out and then submitting it, usually in-
formally, to the officials and finally officially.

In regard to art commissions, we have none, but we were
very much gratified recently by having the Board of Con-
trol, of its own motion, refer to the plan commission the
matter of four bridges for which the city was then making
plans and ask the commission to cooperate with the bridge
engineer in supplying the architectural treatment of
those bridges. A precedent was thus set in the direc-
tion of municipal art control, or of including the func-
tion, at least temporarily, in the one body connected with
the city that is more or less technically and esthetically
competent.

Mr. Olmsted:

I should like to go back again to the point which has
been touched upon several times before, in regard to the
powers of the city planning authority for enforcing the
plan. The Pennsylvania method which was touched on by
Mr. Johnson is in some respects like the German method.
It apparently relies on the police power to prevent erection
of buildings on land designated for future use in streets,
since no provision is made for compensation until the land
is actually put to use by the public, although in the mean-
time the use of the land is limited just as if an easement
had been acquired by the city. In carrying out and en-
forcing a city planning scheme one must rely upon two
powers, the police power and the power of eminent domain.
In regard to a great many provisions of a complete city
plan it is obvious that they can justly and reasonably be
enforced under the police power and without any obligation
for the city to compensate individuals for damages. When
I say justly and reasonably I am not thinking about con-
stitutional limitations, but about the general sense of jus-
tice in the community. You may change constitutional
provisions, but as Mr. Adams pointed out the other day,

[192]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

you cannot systematically violate the public sense
of justice and " get away with it M in a democratic
community.

Now we may and we should utilize the police power for
placing reasonable limitations upon the height or the ex-
tent, the character and the use of buildings upon private
land, all property of a given character being subjected
to the same control. Other parts of the city plan can be
safeguarded in a similar way under the police power. But
when we attempt without compensation to prevent a man
from building within the limits of a proposed public im-
provement which is a part of a city plan to be executed at
some indefinite time in the future, we are liable, in extreme
cases, completely to destroy the value of his property, while
indefinitely postponing compensation. The limits of the
proposed improvement may include the whole of his prop-
erty, and the property may have no value except for build-
ing purposes. To prevent that man for an indefinite length
of time from utilizing that property and to pay him nothing
is generally and rightly regarded as confiscation. What-
ever the state of the law, even in Pennsylvania, the practice
is unfair. I wish to point out that these cases can be
equitably dealt with under the power of eminent domain,
by the use of betterment assessment — a more extended use
than we have been accustomed to, but without any change
of principle. In order to preserve its future welfare the
city may take an easement covering land included within
a proposed public improvement which gives it the right to
require the removal, at some future time, of any structures
which may have been erected upon the land in question
after the acquirement of the easement. For such an ease-
ment the owner of the land must in fairness be compensated,
but that compensation can and should be distributed over
that part of the city the future welfare of which is safe-
guarded by the taking of that easement, whether it is for a
future street or for any other public purpose; and if the
owner of the land on which the easement was acquired is

[193]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

also the owner of other land in the area of benefit, his
assessment may equal the payment to him for the easement.

Chairman Crawford:

We have had a good deal of experience with this matter
in Pennsylvania. All our street extensions have been made
under the police power by preventing building within the
lines of plotted streets. There has been little or no oppo-
sition to it or complaint of it except in a few individual
cases. Theoretically I agree with Mr. Olmsted. Owners
should not be prevented from using their property or alter-
ing it over an indefinite period, and cities are often slow
in putting through streets which have been long plotted
on a plan. We trace the attempt to wipe out the whole
system of city planning in Philadelphia to this restraint
on the use of property without compensation. We defeated
the attempt by a sort of compromise. The provision now
is that a park or parkway in a built-up section may be
plotted on our city plan and may stay there for five years,
at the end of which time if the city has not acted sooner the
land plotted for a park becomes automatically owned by
the city. It is purchased and opened. Of course condem-
nation proceedings may delay the actual conclusion of the
matter two or three years more. The act which resulted
from this compromise is now before the governor.

Mr. Arthur C. Comey, Cambridge:

The experience in Massachusetts is rather negative. It
bears on this point very directly, though. We have in
Massachusetts a building line law which provides for com-
pensation under the power of eminent domain. The only
question comes whether the compensation shall be paid at
the time the building line is established or when the lot
is actually taken; that and several other bad features in
the law have resulted in so much mix-up as to when the
actual damage is to be assessed that the law has not been
used to any great extent. Several cases have been decided

[194]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

under it, and it is a valuable proceeding. I think that the
matter of condemnation for this purpose is very important,
and I believe in it thoroughly. But all those good things
have their bad side. The difficulty for most cities would
be that if they established a series of building lines of this
sort, for instance if they established an entire district and
city plan by building lines, if the damages were not assessed
until the property was actually taken — or until the build-
ing permits were requested, as Dr. Whitten has suggested —
the city would not know how far it had attempted to obli-
gate itself and would not know how deeply in its pocket it
would have to go at any time to take these properties. And
as the city is generally not deemed to be able to bind it-
self for future years, this principle has been rendered rather
difficult of application. On the other hand, if you condemn
the right to build at the time you adopt the city plan, you
get into a good deal of expenditure for nothing on the
surface, simply the right to open up in the future.

The other point I wish to bring up is the matter of state
planning and the state supervision of plans. In Massa-
chusetts, as you know, the Homestead Commission is an ad-
visory board as far as planning is concerned. It reports
on legislation and assists local boards in so far as it can.
It is not an executive commission at the present. The
situation is a great deal different from what it is in De-
troit or any of the western cities, where there is a large
belt outside of the city of rural country or township coun-
try. All Massachusetts and all New England are cut up
entirely among the organized towns and cities, and each
one of those, the larger ones at least, has its own board.
Therefore we get a direct conflict. The city of Lawrence,
which has 90,000 people, really spreads over neighboring
towns, several of them — there are three neighboring towns,
one of which has 11,000 and its own planning board —
finds it is absolutely unable to control its own development
outside of city limits. Therefore it seems very desirable
that we should have some coordinating body, particularly

[195]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

in Massachusetts, which has a very high density of pop-
ulation. Further, ultimately in a state like Massachu-
setts at least, where the density is second only to Rhode
Island and less than but two of the smallest European
countries, we should have a state plan to which town plans
would conform. We have fragments of state plans for
highways and some of those things, but there is no coor-
dination between departments. The whole matter should
be coordinated, particularly in the matter of highways and
state parks. A very valuable report came out last year,
the Connecticut State Park System, and I recommend to
those who have not seen it that they should read it. It
treats the subject very broadly and very practically. It
shows that in Connecticut, which is the third state in the
Union in density, unless they move very quickly the people
will have absolutely no place to go for recreation.

Hon. Edward M. Bassett:

I presume that the state of New York is about as con-
servative as any state along this important matter of pre-
venting the use for private purposes of land within the
lines of a plotted street, and when you think how far that
conservative position goes under the decisions of our courts,
you can see how we would all wish to be as far along as
Pennsylvania in the willingness of its courts to recognize
some sanctity to those places laid out within mapped lines.
Mr. Crawford properly puts much emphasis upon the need
of some such safeguard. In the state of New York the
entire future city plan is imperiled by the lack of it.

Let us say that an outlying part of the Borough of
Queens needs a boulevard. It is put on the city map, but
since all mapped streets have no recognized sanctity, it is
an invitation for builders to erect their buildings within
the mapped lines in order that the opening of the street
will bring a condemnation award to them out of which
they hope to make a profit. I have in mind today in
Queens a location where an important street joins a boule-

[196]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

vard running to Rockaway, and as the street is not open
all the way to the boulevard, the builder is erecting some
structures right in the course of the proper extension of
the street to the boulevard. Our courts have been very firm
in preserving full right of use of private property. There
is a group of us in New York, some in Buffalo, Syracuse
and some of our other large cities pressing toward the ac-
complishment of some relief either by interpretation of
the constitution or by amendment of it.

Mr. B. Moses, Scranton, Pa.:

We have in Scranton adopted a plan which works very
well that no street can be constructed and no building
erected until referred to the planning commission. The
planning commission recommends to the council and the
council almost unanimously does what we recommend.
When the commission was established in Scranton two years
ago we had only small playgrounds around the school-
houses, but inside of three months we will have one public
playground for which $25,000 has been appropriated. In
the matter of heights of buildings, we have one building in
the city 125 feet high, the next one is going to be 150 feet,
but that is the limit. No one can build a building of any
kind in our city higher than 150 feet.

[197]

REMARKS AT THE CLOSING DINNER

REMARKS AT THE CLOSING DINNER

Charles Moore, Toastmaster
Chairman Commission of Fine Arts

President Wilson, catching an apt phrase from Robert
Louis Stevenson, has spoken of " the forward-looking
men." The phrase applies most happily to city planners,
for of all men they work for the future ; and plan as largely
as they may, their plans will be too small before they are
finished.

I am here to speed the parting guests. We have enjoyed
having you here, and it is melancholy indeed to think that
when the sun rises tomorrow morning we shall have left with
us only Mr. Veiller, Mr. Ihlder and Miss Chadsey. To-
morrow they will have put off their Cinderella robes and
appear in the garb of ordinary housing experts.

This Conference has established new records. The first
record was broken by Mr. Lewis, an engineer who showed
a genuine appreciation of architecture in matters of prac-
tice. The engineer usually feels that he builds the structure
and then turns it over to the architect to paste the orna-
ments on it.

Mr. Clipston Sturgis broke the second record. Appear-
ing in his official capacity as president of the American
Institute of Architects, Mr. Sturgis urged the exercise of
common sense in city planning. His plea sounded like the
first page of Descartes' " Treatise on Method," where we
are told that everybody thinks he possesses common sense,
and yet that quality is unique in the world. Mr. Shurtleff
should make record of this in red ink on his slides, then
Detroit would have the first place in something.

[201]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

And yet in spite of this fine record, you have come short
of what was expected of you. When Mayor Marx de-
parted, he said that he was leaving the Conference in Mr.
Dust's hands with the confident expectation that by the
time he returned the Belle Isle Bridge would be finished by
this Conference. And Walter Campbell is disappointed
that you did not put the fish in Isle a la Peche.

You have been most diligent in your labors. Mr. Ninde
and Mr. Ford have started a sales department that will
place city planning on the bargain counter frequented by
every editor in the land. You subdivided East Boston and
Fort Wayne while the steamer " Ste. Claire " was subdivid-
ing Lake Erie — probably with equal results.

I dare say that you are somewhat disappointed in your
visit to Detroit. Perhaps you were expecting that the sub-
dividers would get a chance at one of those Ford surpluses
of which you have heard so much. Don't go away with any
misapprehension. A part of that surplus you have this
evening consumed, along with those of the Packard, Cadil-
lac and Chalmers, to say nothing of the Denby Truck.
I hope they will agree with you as well as they seem to
agree with our friend John Anderson, whose smiling face
we welcome.

Seriously speaking, you have done us good. You have
come at a time when the people of Detroit have large prob-
lems to solve. You stand for right solutions of municipal
problems, and your influence will be felt not only here in
Detroit, but throughout Michigan, whose cities are now
taking up the task of fitting the municipalities to meet the
commercial demands forced upon them by manifest destiny.
So we have appreciated your coming, and we hope you will
come again, when we have the new center of arts and letters,
the new bridge to the island and the new Scott fountain
and statue.

When a young man was introduced to one of the prime
ministers of England as a very modest young man, the
minister said: " Ah, yes, and tell me please what the, young

[202]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

man has done to be modest about." That young man had
not taken up city planning, because all city planners have
something to be modest about. When Mayor Mitchel was
introduced to the audience in San Francisco the other day,
he said that it was said that he was the best exhibit that
New York City had at the exposition. That means that
the old days, the days of Tweed and others of that kind in
New York City, have passed, and that for the most part —
we will not say anything about occasional lapses — but
for the most part that city is coming into the hands of ex-
perts, and a number of those experts are here tonight, and
among them is Mr. Bassett, whom I am going to call on as
the first speaker of the evening. Mr. Bassett, who knows
all about the heights of buildings and a good deal of how to
get them regulated.

Hon. Edward M. Bassett, Chairman Heights of Buildings
Commission, New York City:

This has been a most orderly conference. Things have
gone along in the way that was fixed beforehand. All were
here. President Olmsted was here with that beautiful
crushed strawberry necktie, that we would miss if he did
not bring it along, because that sets the pace. Mr. Ford
down in New York once in a while appears at our city
planning meetings in that fashion. We admire it. It is
a bright spot in the landscape. The Three Guardsmen are
here, Veiller, Crawford and Bennett. Brockway and I have
been trying to break into that sacred band for the last two
or three years without success. I made another try at a
subterranean restaurant in this town, but looking at their
well fed proportions, I suggested that it might be Thirty
Years After. And I think that now I am doomed to outer
darkness.

Thomas Adams is here — with his wife this time. We
always want you to come with Mr. Adams, Mrs. Adams.
Nelson Lewis and Alfred Bettman, Ihlder, Nolen, Good-
rich, Leavitt, Mulford Robinson of Rochester, Pond of

[203]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Chicago, all are here. But Purdy is not here, and
Purdy is what reminds me that this is such an orderly
conference.

It was a little more than two years ago that Mr. Purdy
telephoned me : " Bassett, they want you to prepare a
paper." Oh, I was innocent. " They want you to pre-
pare a paper on the subject of title to land for public uses,
in a typical city " ; that is as near as I can remember it. It
was one of those four hour subjects. Well I prepared the
paper, and it took me about two months. I came on with
the thing copied. I was told by Crawford that I could have
just ten minutes. I said: " What do I do in ten minutes? "
" Well," Crawford said, " you can't read your paper ; all
you can do is just speak the gist of it." Well then I went
to Shurtleff and I said: " What shall I do? " " Why," he
said, " you just speak it and take all the time you want."
Purdy was the presiding officer with the gavel. I went at
it to speak it. I could have read it in twenty minutes if
they would let me; I tried to speak it in ten minutes, and
when I jogged along for three quarters of an hour, Purdy
got impatient and nudged me to sit down. I dodged him
once or twice, and then I sat down, and what do you think
happened? Crawford was to be the first agitator of my
subject. He held up a watch just like this. I had pulled
out my watch that way and looked at it once in a while,
so that the audience would know that I was cognizant of
the time. Crawford pulled his watch out and he said : " I,
too, have a watch." " But," he said, " J am going to respect
my watch."

Well that was not so bad. I could have stood that.
But then he went on to say that the previous speaker
had dwelt on the constitution. " These are not subjects
for the constitution, gentlemen," he said. " The way to do
is to disregard the constitution and go ahead and get re-
sults." Well that made me feel bad, because in New York
we people who had been trying to do city planning had
learned to have some regard for the appellate courts, be-

[204]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

cause some way or other you cannot put things through
those New York appellate courts very easily; and Craw-
ford did get a jolt after a little while when he went back to
Philadelphia. He was so proud of that Sulzburger decision
that had disregarded the constitution. But the appellate
courts got back at Crawford, and overturned the Sulz-
burger decision, and I notice that our friend Crawford
is here this year in a chastened spirit. He has n't tried
to hold the clock on me and the constitution.

Well I am used to quiet affairs, orderly conferences like
this one. I live in Flatbush. Out in Flatbush we shovel
our walks in the winter and we make our gardens in the
summer, and we are quite different from those folks like
Veiller, Goodrich and Ihlder, who live up in that marble
palace district of Central Manhattan. I am not used to
such strenuous times as we had in Chicago. If we had a
quarter of an hour between sessions, George Hooker would
say : " Come around to the City Club and we will have a
conference on housing," or Bennett would get us out to
see a street; and after I had been in the swirl for three
days — and wanted nothing so much as to get to the quiet
of Flatbush — as a final denouement I lost my hat. My
friend Moses of Scranton reminded me of that the first
day I came to this town and asked me whether I had had
serious trouble hanging on to my hat since the Chicago
convention. When I struck the train that night, I was in
a damaged condition.

Well in Detroit everything is so orderly. We started
out on that automobile ride. I sat with the chauffeur in our
car. As we slipped by things on the road, we qame to a
grand palace where an army of workmen were landscape
gardening, and the chauffeur said he owned that. We
came by a skyscraper downtown, well, nearly as big as the
Woolworth Building. He said he owned that. Pretty soon
I learned he made about a million dollars a day. I had
just told him that if he ever got out of a job, he could come
down to our town, and we would give him two dollars a day,

[205]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

he was such a good chauffeur. That was Kresge of De-
troit with branches in every large city.

You people in Detroit, you take us visitors around with
millionaire chauffeurs, and the town is ours. Campbell
takes us out in his big boat; and after the town has been
given to us, and all the Detroit River, he tries to give us
Canada. But, after deciding that he was going to give us
Canada, he found that he did not have clearance papers,
so he could not deliver the key.

I bring a greeting from New York to Detroit. The
hospitality that you have shown to this Conference is over-
whelming. Some of us have studied your problems as well
as we could in a few days. New York has been through
many of those problems. Every great industrial city must
have regard to the welfare of its workingmen. It is
economy. If a city gets five million people, as New York
City is, and if a workingman is to have a family of
five children and a wife — I will say a wife and five chil-
dren— yes, the wife comes before the five children, that
is why I changed the location of the wife.

If a workingman is to have a wife and five children, he
has got to be in a nearby place that will have a low rent,
or else he has got to travel, in order to get a low rent, two
or three hours of his waking time. That becomes a great
problem in New York City. If a workingman must pay
high rent, he cannot bring up a family in the crowded down-
town districts of New York City near his work; and if he
has to travel three hours every day, that is a drawback
to his efficiency and he is worth less to his employer.

Detroit can distribute its population in sunny homes
within a brief distance of the workingman's place of work
and at a low fare; this makes efficiency in manufacturing,
and also helps to produce the families that will carry on
the future work of the city. Such cities have an advantage
over great cities like New York or London or Philadelphia.
New York has to build subways at enormous expense in
order to house its workingmen like Detroit.

[206]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Now Detroit is getting to that point where it is one of
the great cities of the world, and where it must more re-
gard this matter of the welfare of the workingman's family
than it did when it was a small city. Workingmen are
living in crowded rooms right here in Detroit; and the re-
sult will be bad for Detroit if it does not do something
to help workingmen's families to spread out in sunny
homes, where they can live near the earth, within a brief
ride of their working places, and at a low fare.

There is the problem that Detroit will soon have to face.
These are halcyon days in Detroit- Your great factories
are at the acme of their efficiency. Workingmen are near.
But let your city increase twice what it is today and you
will find that you will perhaps be outstripped by some
smaller cities unless you provide for your workingmen.

We congratulate Detroit on its magnificent position.
But Detroit must profit by the lessons of the great cities
of the world. London for forty years has been striving at
enormous expense to get its workingmen into sunny homes,
to abolish its depressed localities that have devoured fami-
lies. And Detroit must do those things which will make
this a wholesome, sunny city. We have been discussing
these things upstairs, the opening up of diagonal streets,
improved methods of transit, the better utilization of the
water front, the best size of a city block. All these things
have a relation to making a city a wholesome city for the
future. And in a broad sense that is city planning work,
the adaptation of a large group of human beings to their
environment, so that they will be happy and efficient, so
that they will increase and multiply and be as wholesome
as country districts are. Until a city can do for the human
race what small villages and country districts do for fami-
lies, cities will not be performing their proper function.
They will be devourers of families.

Mr. McAneny, the acting mayor of New York, desired
me to express his best wishes to all of his friends at this
conference. Up to last week he hoped and expected to come,

[ 207 ]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

but on account of having his own duties in addition to those
of the mayor, and being overwhelmed with work, he was
compelled to stay away. Mayor Mitchel was not there
when we left New York, otherwise he would have sent his
respects to this conference and the people of Detroit.

But allow me, in closing, to express our sincerest thanks
for the hospitality of Detroit and to wish an even grander
future for this city as a great industrial city, the home city
of happy and healthy families.

TOASTMASTER MoORE .*

One hundred and three years ago there appeared for the
first time in the then century-old city of Detroit, Captain
Lewis Cass from Ohio. He was our governor for fifteen
years and left his impress not only upon the territory of
Michigan, but also on the whole Northwest. He is still our
first citizen. A year ago one bearing the name of Cass, a
relative or at least a connection of the captain, came to
Detroit and captured our public library competition and
came again a year ago and captured our Scott foun-
tain competition. We are very glad to welcome him
here tonight as a future resident of Detroit, at least
temporarily.

Mr. Gilbert, when he came to Detroit, was not altogether
familiar with the City Planning Conference. He asked:
" What is the constitution and what are the by-laws ? "
Mr. Olmsted said : " There is no constitution and there are
no by-laws." Mr. Gilbert said : " That is the kind of an
organization that I want to belong to. I would like to be
president of such an organization as that." Mr. Olmsted
immediately replied : " Why, all you have to do is to sub-
stitute your name for mine on the note at the bank; then
you can become president of this organization."

Mr. Cass Gilbert, Member Commission of Fine Arts:

I know why Detroit succeeds. It is led by the gifted imag-
ination and counseled by the silver tongue of Charles Moore.

[208]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

If I went back in the history of city planning in America, I
would do as someone else has done, ascribe the parentage
of the whole thing to Major L'Enfant. But I would have
to come down rapidly over a considerable stretch of time to
the period when — and I speak seriously now — when,
counseled by your fellow townsman, under the patronage
of your great Senator McMillan, the Washington Park
Commission was appointed and the plan of the city of
Washington, revised, reorganized and embellished, be-
came possible under the guidance of Burnham, Mc-
Kim, St. Gaudens & Olmsted, and there at the helm
and close in counsel was your fellow townsman, Charles
Moore.

So if my introduction to this audience is not fortunate,
if I have to come to you under any guise at all, it will be
under the guise and mask of a friend of Charles Moore, and
I am proud of it.

Now this imaginary conversation of which he has told
you as between Olmsted and me is one of the most brilliant
feats of a highly constructive mind that I have ever known,
and the curious part of it is that the conversation did actu-
ally take place. But I made one condition, that there should
be no rules of professional ethics that would invite charges
of unprofessional conduct. They refused to make that con-
dition, and I promptly withdrew my candidacy.

My next neighbor here, Mr. Kirchner, in our conversa-
tion tonight has stated a fundamental truth, and it is sur-
prising to me that I had n't thought of it before — well
it does n't surprise me after all that I did n't think of it,
because none of us think of fundamental truths very often ;
they are elusive. I cannot say it in the eloquent tones
which he probably would use if he were addressing you, but
this is what he said: " The architectural condition of our
cities is the price we have paid for liberty! " Said humor-
ously, it is nevertheless a very profound observation. If
you will stop to think of it, private enterprise and private
liberty and private rights and a subdivided block and a

[209]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

little area of land built up close, and all that results from
the fact that a man of modest means owns one piece of
property, and a family embarrassed by a poorly paying
estate another, and the next some great millionaire who
can afford to do anything he wishes, make a condition of
individual liberty of action which produces a sky line
that is as varied and interesting as the history of the
individual property owners themselves. Interesting and
picturesque yes, but seldom well organized and rarely
beautiful.

Yet out of that condition have we to organize and create
civic order and civic embellishment. Our cities have grown,
and grown enormously; we forget how fast they have
grown, and we constantly refer to their rapid growth and
brag about it and forget what it really means.

I was looking over — in order to prepare myself for some
kind of a speech, and did not succeed in doing it — I was
looking over a book on town planning written in England.
I forget who wrote it, it was too big. But I remember one
statement to the effect that Philadelphia at the time of the
Civil War — I take my English friend's statement as cor-
rect — had 40,000 inhabitants and it was the largest city
in the United States, by which I suppose it means that it
was larger than New York.

(Mr. Olmsted interjects " The Revolutionary War.")

I accept Mr. Olmsted's correction; let us go back to
the Revolutionary War. It is only about one hundred
and thirty or forty years ago, and what is forty or
fifty thousand people between friends or fifty years in the
course of town planning? Within a period so short as that
the entire business of building cities has grown up in this
country. And we are confronted now with the situation
where a vast proportion of our people live under urban
conditions, and in a sort of a faltering way it has gradu-
ally penetrated into the minds of men now in active life
that something has got to be done about it, and various

[210]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

methods of solving these problems, such as have been sug-
gested by our distinguished friend Mr. Bassett in the
housing of workingmen, have come to be considered, and
various citizens have entered upon various projects for meet-
ing these practical needs. In New York, where I pass a
portion of my time, they have been trying to solve the
question of congestion by means of rapid transit. The net
result so far has been that they never have caught up with
the rapid transit scheme; and the more people they are
able to take out of a center into the country, the
more people they are able to bring back from the coun-
try into the center, and the net result is that the con-
gestion is greater than it was before. We cannot al-
ways solve such problems, sometimes they solve them-
selves. But we should examine and study them and help
as we can.

We are trying to solve these problems in various ways.
We will not solve them all by any one of the ways that have
been proposed. Rapid transit will not solve them. The
zone system will not solve them. But various efforts will
bring out a solution. Whatever the final solution of hous-
ing and transportation, it will be found to be based on
sound civic economics.

No city under our form of government can provide for
its embellishment except incidentally until it has paid its
bills for operation. Each city, with the single exception
of the national capital, must pay its own way or create its
own debts and pay the interest charges that run against
those debts. And the only way that can be done is by taxa-
tion, and when taxation rises to a point that it becomes
confiscatory, the operation will cease, because the income
will disappear by reason of those who pay the income being
driven from the occupancy. I do not want to be too tech-
nical about it, but it begins to seem to me that our great
civic planning enterprises must ally themselves a little more
closely with the practical conditions of municipal manage-
ment and municipal finance.

[211]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

I think perhaps it is not the best place, at a dinner,
where humor and wit and merriment should prevail, to in-
troduce so serious a subject. It perhaps should be dis-
cussed only in the hall where the debates have been going
on. But it does seem to me that these great and very desir-
able objects which we have in view may be touched on here
for only a moment. We are advocating a cause which
should interest all good citizens. We are advocating the
making of better cities and making them better organized,
better planned, more beautiful, more acceptable to live in,
with better housing for rich and poor alike ; and while pro-
viding better utilities for sanitation, transportation, edu-
cation and health, offering also opportunities for sane
recreation and enjoyment, art galleries, libraries, museums,
music halls and all that makes civic life attractive and de-
sirable. If those things are to be accomplished, they can
only be accomplished by making the means meet the end.

I anticipate that no city government of wisdom and
sanity would for a moment hesitate to carry out the rea-
sonable plans for city improvement which our friends de-
sign, if the means to do so were available.

Why, in New York, Riverside Drive would be extended
away up the Hudson at once if they had the money ; diag-
onal avenues would undoubtedly be cut. Small public parks
and playgrounds, which are so very necessary in that
crowded community — and will be here if they are not al-
ready — would be provided at once if they had the means.
But they must first provide for the great need of carrying
on the city government, with its police, its schools, its street
cleaning, its various necessary administrative functions.
I have been told that if New York were governed from the
standpoint of efficiency, regardless of politics, all these
things could be done and there would be ample funds left
over for civic development.

City planning goes hand in hand with good city govern-
ment and means good local city government in all depart-
ments.

[212]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

This matter of city planning is a very old one. It is so
old that it is hard to find the origin of it. Romulus and
Remus quarreled over it. The Greeks practiced it. At
Syracuse Girgenti and many old Greek cities there are fre-
quent evidences of it. Babylon's hanging gardens are pro-
verbial. Its parks and pleasure grounds are described by
Herodotus. In Egypt and in Lydia kings and potentates
gave thought to such matters and recorded with pride their
accomplishment of great city plan projects. Solomon the
wise was himself a great city planner. The Roman em-
perors like Hadrian were famous for their great civic
P works, and Napoleon, most practical of men, dreamed a
new Paris, while Washington and Jefferson, looking to the
future of our country, wisely gave thought and practical
expression to these matters. And no doubt these discus-
sions which we hold today were indulged in then. They
were all dreamers, just as we are dreamers, and they
dreamed sometimes in a great big way, looking out into the
future, so much larger than the mere practical man would
think possible.

The plans that are made for today are always too small
for tomorrow, and the plans that we may make for to-
morrow are always too big for today.

And so we must solve these problems by so devising our
plans that those things which are to be done tomorrow shall
be done in tomorrow's order and with tomorrow's means;
that those things which are of today must be done with the
means which are at hand today.

A city is a mechanism. It is a complicated mechanism,
it has parts and must work together. The buildings are
only the machinery that makes the land usable, and they
are all temporary. Even the best of them are temporary.
The largest of them are only temporary. And it seems
strange when we say that, for speaking in terms of the life-
time of a man they are fairly permanent. But in the life-
time of a city they are very, very temporary; and when
that machinery which we call a city, or that cog in the

[213]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

wheel which we call a building,- becomes obsolete and its
parts are worn out or are small for the function it must
perform, then it behooves us and our communities, our city
governments, to find a way to renew it and to enlarge it
to meet our ever growing needs, and in so doing to act with
minds big enough and with hearts courageous enough to
look forward into the grand future which this country is
sure to have.

And no American city need ever be afraid to look that
future in the face with courage, with determination and
with zeal. Your city here in Detroit is one of many great
cities. You are not alone in your prosperity. You are
among the first. You are in the front rank, but your prob-
lem is not the only problem. It is one of many problems.
As you solve it others will solve their problems, and they
will always be solved in America with courage, with intel-
ligence and with enthusiasm. But these problems of civic
improvement never will be solved at all unless they are
solved with common sense.

TOASTMASTER MOORE :

None of us who were at Toronto last year will forget
the gracious dignity with which the conference was wel-
comed to the Dominion by the Governor General of Canada,
the Duke of Connaught. His speech at the beginnning of
the conference, his gracious hospitality during its sessions,
were the thread of gold that ran through the whole meeting.
We ought to have had more of our Canadian brethren than
we have had at this conference, but owing to exigencies
quite beyond their control, they are with us only in small
numbers.

We welcome most heartily those who are here. Mr.
Adams, if he has enjoyed a warm welcome, can understand
that a part of it belongs to him as the representative of
the Dominion of Canada. Another part of it, and a large
part of it too, belongs to him personally, because he has
been found to be a friend and a brother. He has been in-

[214]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

itiated into the mysteries of the General Committee — .
where Mr. Veiller passes the hat ! It gives us great pleasure
to welcome Mr. Adams, and we shall hear from him as the
representative of Canada.

Mr. Thomas Adams, Town Planning Adviser Commission
of Conservation of Canada:

I assure you that it is a great honor to be here as rep-
resenting Canada, as it is a great privilege to be here
amongst American citizens who are working side by side
with us in dealing with the great problem of city growth.
We are trying to solve conditions of a very similar charac-
ter on both sides of the boundary line which separates us.

The question raised by Mr. Gilbert regarding the diffi-
culties of the financial situation confronts everyone who
has to deal with these problems. We are called dreamers,
but we are dreamers only in the sense that we are trying
to apply some imagination to the practical problems we are
confronted with, and I do not think that necessarily means
that we are not trying to provide a practical foundation to
all the dreams which we have.

I remember well in my early connection with the move-
ment that the architect and the engineer, men like Mr.
Lewis and Mr. Bennett, representing the two principal pro-
fessions interested in town planning, had their own partic-
ular notions as to what their position should be in regard
to the planning of a city. I had a great deal to do with
the planning of some of these cities where we had the en-
gineer working side by side with the architect. I remem-
ber one occasion when the engineer was asked to sink an
artesian well to supply a garden city with water, and the
architect came along and said he objected to the erection
of a galvanized iron pumping shed, but he would accept it
if it was painted in green, so as to harmonize with the sur-
rounding trees. The engineer replied: "Well I don't
object if you put up a notice on the shed to the effect that
the engineer is not responsible for the paint."

[215]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Now I think that rather suggests that both have their
separate functions, and they ought to keep to those func-
tions. The engineer has to do with that part of city plan-
ning which is concerned with the laying down of the great
arterial highways leading from our cities, the laying down
of our systems of drainage, our systems of sewerage and
our water supply, which come in at the earlier stages of our
city development.

We are trying and have tried to harmonize in Great
Britain the duties of both of these professions so that they
will work together and yet not unduly overlap or cause
friction between each other. In that connection we have
established in Great Britain a Town Planning Institute,
which has four classes of members. In that institute we
have as members the chief municipal engineers in Great
Britain connected with town planning. There are many
leading architects like Professor Adshead, the town plan-
ning professor of London University, Mr. Lanchester, Mr.
Unwin, Sir Arthur Webb and other names which are famil-
iar to architects here. There are surveyors and landscape
architects like Mr. Mawson and myself, and there are law-
yers like Mr. Abbott, Mr. Birkett and others, who have de-
voted themselves especially to this problem.

These four professions have combined together to form
the Town Planning Institute. I mention that as an indica-
tion of the widespread character of this problem we are
dealing with. We have to approach it not as if any one
man could deal with all the problems of city development,
but as something in which there is room for cooperation of
these varied professions.

Now, sir, in Canada we are trying to deal with this prob-
lem in a way which I think will help you to appreciate the
difficulties mentioned by Mr. Gilbert, who had just spoken
on the financial problem. We take the attitude that town
planning does not mean spending more, but means spending
more wisely. We think we can save money and not increase
expenditure by town planning.

[216]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

It has been said that San Francisco could have saved
$26,000,000 if it had been planned according to the topog-
raphy of the land instead of in the rectangular way in
which it has been laid out. Other cities have used hydraulic
means to drive through mountain sides, because the streets
have been laid out without any regard to the physical fea-
ture of the land. Liverpool, on the other side of the Atlan-
tic, has spent £10,000,000, or $50,000,000, to remedy evils
in development, evils which have been handed down to it
from the past. London has in about fifty years spent
$150,000,000 to deal with congestion and other difficulties
which have been created from want of planning.

Therefore we approach this question not as a means of
adding to taxation, but of saving it. It may not be that
it is a means of immediate saving, but certainly it is a
means of securing a sound and profitable investment.

Now, sir, I sometimes find myself in conflict with my
town planning friends when I say that we have got to deal
ith this thing in a practical way. I won't yield to anyone
in a matter of having idealism, in a matter of trying to
secure the best results from the point of view of esthetic
effect in regard to city planning, although I have some re-
gard for that philosophy expressed by Aristotle to the
effect that beauty is the purgation of superfluity, that sim-
plicity represents the highest form of beauty. On some
of our mountain sides, where we see the little cottages built
in timber with fine proportion and admirable setting, seem-
ing almost to be part of the landscape, we see that form of
)eauty. Some of these simple artificial effects, united with
the beautiful in nature, make pictures of which this conti-
nent may well be proud. We have some grander results in
the simple beauty of these rural landscapes than we get in
the classic facades which are found in the streets of our
Torontos or Montreals and some of our larger cities. Ex-
cellent in themselves, some of these fine architectural build-
ings are designed and erected without regard to their sur-
roundings. That is where the architect can help us so

[217]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

much, although he is very largely the prey of the client who
employs him. The old Greeks set their beautiful and dig-
nified buildings on the heights which dominated their cities.
We borrow their architecture and place fine classic struc-
tures among our skyscrapers, where they form part of a
group of incongruous rows of buildings in closely crowded
streets. Perhaps that applies more to Canada than to the
United States. But in that respect, at any rate, there is
immediate room for the work of the architect in saving us
from the evils of misplaced genius.

Now, sir, I would like to indicate one or two directions
in which we think we are going to solve this problem of finan-
cial difficulty in Canada by means of town planning. I rep-
resent the Commission of Conservation of Canada. The
word " conservation " suggests what we are. Our object is
to conserve national resources. We have the same problem
as you have here in the increase of urban population. In
1871 Canada had 14 per cent of her population in cities
and today we have 50 per cent. These cities have grown
without proper plans. In connection with that growth
there has been a great deal of speculation in land. There
has been uncontrolled subdivision of land, along with an un-
desirable system of fixing values for assessment purposes.
Some cities are committed to public improvements far in
excess of the immediate revenue producing value of the land
and the buildings in these cities. Some of our western cities
in Canada are subdivided to the extent necessary to provide
for the whole present population of the Dominion.

With regard to one of these cities I estimated that if the
city grew as rapidly in the future as it had done in the
past, and it has grown very rapidly, if I had been the for-
tunate person who had bought the subdivision which was
most remote from the center of that town at $500 an acre,
and I held that land and was the unfortunate individual
who was the last to sell it, I should have to get half a mil-
lion dollars to pay me compound interest on the investment.

That is one of our difficulties. They are difficulties com-

[218]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

mon to both of our countries. These are financial prob-
lems that you can help to solve with proper town planning.
Town planning ought to be a means of exercising foresight,
and with all deference to Mr. Moore, common sense, in
regard to these matters, so that we shall not only secure
beauty, as we can afford to spend a little extra here and
there in securing it, but that we may be able to protect
future generations from the social evils that have been
handed down to us.

We should not pay too much regard to that aspect of
city planning which is confined to the replanning of exist-
ing conditions. I mean we should not confine our attention
to that aspect to the exclusion of the others. In Detroit
you are very much limited in what you can do in the exist-
ing city, because of the financial and other conditions and
the difficulties which would be created by increasing the
present obligations of the taxpayer. But that does not
mean that Detroit is prevented from securing, with all the
undeveloped land in the city, proper safeguards by regula-
tion, so that its unbuilt upon areas shall be developed in a
healthy manner for the future; so that those who come
after will be in a position to say that they are saved the
expense of replanning. All this expense of pulling down
>uildings to secure wide arteries, for which we blame want
if foresight on the part of previous generations, will still
tave to be incurred in fifty years in respect of the open land
this city if we do not plan it now. I will put it in an-
)ther form. Sometimes the town planner is faced with
this argument : " You are fifteen years too late. Why
lid n't you come along before Mr. Ford found out the way
to manufacture a cheap motor, and why didn't you plan
Highland Park before he brought all those thousands of
men into that district? " That argument will be used fifty
years hence, as it is being used today. We cannot go back
and collect spilt milk, but we can look forward and avoid
its being spilt in future. That is our problem just as much
as altering existing conditions, and it is a problem which

[219]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

we can deal with without increased expenditure. We say
with regard to this matter in Canada that we will have to
deal with the existing conditions, that is, with areas already
developed, gradually as we can afford it. We will have to
widen the street that is already built upon as our revenue
will enable us to do so by a gradual process. We get archi-
tectural advice and engineering advice as to what the best
thing is to do, but let us deal with that gradually. But
meanwhile, by means of town planning legislation, we will
plan new areas so as to prevent the future necessity of
costly replanning. In other words, we are seeking to pre-
vent future evils by comprehensive schemes which will cost
us very little and to cure existing evils by a gradual process.
Prevention is much cheaper than cure. I venture to say
in some of our large cities, in Toronto and Montreal for
instance, that the cost of curing existing evils is almost
beyond us. But the cost of preventing bad development in
future in our suburbs and in our smaller cities, in places
that have grown up in the last ten years, in places like
Ojibway on the other side of the water, which may possibly
grow up in the next ten years, will be trifling, considering
the great benefits to be derived. We are getting the power
by legislation to lay down the planning for the future, and
we have sufficient optimism, as I know you have sufficient
optimism, to believe that all the cities have not yet reached
the stage when they are going to stand still, but they are
going to grow as much in the future as they have in the past.

If you believe your cities are growing and if you believe
that you have by intelligence and by your study of this
question arrived at certain conclusions regarding what
should be done in connection with new developments, surely
the right thing to do, even if you are face to face with the
difficulty of altering existing conditions, is to obtain power
through your federal and state governments to enable you
to deal with those new developments in an intelligent way
and with the application of science and common sense.

We have 66 foot streets as the minimum for the whole

[220]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

of Ontario on the other side of the river. It would be just
as sensible to prescribe that every sewer must be of the
same diameter. A street ought to be designed for the pur-
pose for which it is going to be used, and the main artery,
in these days of the motor car, should be much wider than
the short residence street leading to a few houses.

We as town planners have to tell those who manage our
cities and towns that the width of a street is a matter to
be determined according to the purpose for which the street
is required, and we are in a position to advise them what
that width should be, so as to save money now both in local
improvements and in expensive replanning in future.

The question of fire protection is an important one for
town planners. In Canada we pay ten times as much for
fire insurance as they do in some countries in Europe. We
are carrying that burden upon our shoulders of which we
could save a considerable part by proper regulation with
regard to the character, the placing and the construction
of buildings and to the distance between the buildings. A
proper town planning scheme would provide for the loca-
tion, construction and placing of buildings which would
secure considerable reduction in fire losses and therefore in
fire premiums.

With regard to other matters of a similar character we
could save large sums of money under properly considered
schemes. If some of our new cities in Canada, and some
of yours in the States, were to construct the sidewalks,
pavements and other improvements as they should be con-
structed for the whole of the areas of these cities, they
would be face to face with a bankrupt condition. That is
because these cities have not been planned with proper re-
gard to the revenue producing value of the properties
erected within them.

With regard to the housing question referred to by
Mr. Bassett, that should be considered not only from the
standpoint of securing pleasant environment, but also
from the standpoint of the commercial value of efficient

[221]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

labor. We pay in Canada about $250,000,000 a year in
wages to our employees in factories. The last ten years
our factories have increased by about 5000 in number.
What is the principal raw material of these industries?
It is the efficiency of the human factor which we have to
use as the means of making those industries successful and
putting our products on the world's market. You have a
splendid example in Detroit of the value of increasing the
efficiency of labor, and you know that when anyone comes
to your country you make a point of having him bring a
health certificate with him so that you are certain he will
be not only a good citizen, but a self-supporting one.

I will give an illustration of another point. In Ottawa
a man who pays a moderate rent will be paying $33 a year
in taxes. His children are being educated. Assume that
he has four children. They are costing the community
$200 a year for education alone — much more in actual
money than he is giving to it. Therefore a large portion of
the benefit which we may derive from that man's labor and
from the labor of his children has to be put against that
loss. To maintain healthy conditions of life for that man
and his family is to help in making him self-supporting and
not a burden on the community, and also in securing that
his children will grow up into healthy citizens. We are
paying in hard cash for healthy and efficient labor under
these conditions ; why then are we so indifferent about the
conditions in which our laborers are housed? I would urge
that town planning which has regard to the health of the
people as a primary consideration is a matter which we
are required to deal with in order that we may save money.
Both your country and mine are largely made up of pio-
neers who have built up their wealth and prosperity on this
continent. We give them liberty, one of those great demo-
cratic privileges which have helped to make these nations
great. Town planning will not curtail liberty, but only the
excesses of liberty.

We are citizens of great countries which have succeeded

[222]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

in making wealth and in using science for creating and buildj
ing up great industries. Let us also endeavor to use that
science and enterprise for the still greater work of securing
the amelioration of social conditions of our people, so that
the United States or Canada may be able to claim, in the
march of civilization, that they have not only been great
in wealth and powerful among the nations of the world,
but that they have paid proper regard to the home life of
the people and left behind them a priceless heritage of
healthy manhood and womanhood as their contribution to
the civilization of the future.

TOASTMASTER MOORE :

In carrying out my duties as toastmaster I should feel
it incumbent upon me to defend Mr. Crawford, if I did
not know that he was able to take care of himself, so I
will merely tell in introducing him one of Frank Miles
Day's stories about the Philadelphian who was going home
very late one night and said to the policeman : " Is this
Chestnut Street or is it Wednesday? "

Andrew Wright Crawford, Esq.:

I was much interested in Mr. Bassett's reference to my
watch, and in his objections to my use of it. A tenderfoot
out West happened into a poker den and watched one of
the hands that was being played. Alongside of him was a
big bruiser watching the same hand. Presently it became
the turn of the man whose hand they were watching to deal,
and the tenderfoot saw him give four aces from the bot-
tom of the pack to his own hand. He whispered to the
bruiser: " See that? " " See what? " " That man took
four aces from the bottom of the pack and dealt them to
himself." " Well, it 's his turn, ain't it? " At the con-
ference two years ago I thought Bassett would talk so
long that I would not have a turn.

It used to be thought that Philadelphia was not as strenu-
ous as New York, but the shoe is on the other foot now.

[223]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Mr. Lewis told me of an experience he had in New York
with Mr. John C. Trautwine, one of our eminent Philadel-
phia engineers. Mr. Trautwine and Mr. Lewis were stand-
ing on a street corner downtown in New York a few months
ago, when a horse car came by, and Trautwine turned to
Lewis and said reflectively : " No wonder Philadelphia used
to be called slow ! "

It is twenty years and more since we had horse cars in
Philadelphia. The last two decades have indeed seen many
changes.

Twenty years ago pessimism with regard to American
municipal government was rampant. That pessimism had
been voiced by Bryce, not for the purpose of criticism but
of warning. By 1893 it had become the prevailing fashion.
But it was worse than a fashion. It was an influence. It
halted action. It crippled progress. It even clouded
visions. It was as if we then used the present-day phrase:
" Today is that tomorrow of which yesterday we hoped
so much." We. did not then add : " If tomorrow we would
not be as disappointed as we are today, we must act today."

And yet twenty years ago there had already begun the
municipal renaissance which is so evident throughout Amer-
ica today. It was in 1893 that three significant things hap-
pened which have combined to produce the city-building
movement that has been and is, I believe, the greatest force
in the dissolution of municipal pessimism.

I remarked just now that that pessimism had clouded
vision. But it had not killed it. Hope is eternal and
vision is hope concentrated. My fellow city planners will
have anticipated me in naming the three things that hap-
pened in 1893 as the publication in one form or another
of three great dreams. We hear sometimes that the plans
for city growth that we are presenting from year to year
are staggering. But none of them compare to the stagger-
ing shock that must have been felt in Boston when Eliot's
.audacious outer park scheme was proposed; or to that in
Ivansas City at the publication of its suggested interior

[224 ]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

park and parkway system; or at Burnham's civic center,
that the world has since acclaimed as the Court of Honor
of the World's Fair of Chicago. I remind you of these
twice-told tales to nerve you on to things not only as
bold, but bolder: to beg you to dream greater dreams,
see greater visions. For it is indeed true, as the toast-
master said, that what we prepare today is vastly surpassed
tomorrow.

City planners need perspective — perspective of the
past, I mean. They are not city planners at all if a per-
spective of the future is not theirs ; but the perspective of
the past — the realization of great things done — is per-
suasive. I do not think there is anything that we need so
much as to remind ourselves constantly that Eliot's dream
is today far more than realized; that Kansas City boasts
the actual possession of a park system double that dreamed
twenty years ago. And if we need it — if, in the slow prog-
ress from month to month, from year to year — we need
the constant stimulus of the story of great things done —
the general public needs it far more. Show your indiffer-
ent man in the street a city plan and he will in secret deride
you ; show him a similar plan of another city and tell him
that that city has done the thing, and he will show surprise ;
tell him that it has physically been far more than realized
and he will question your statement : but he who questions
is lost to indifference.

It is because of the faith that is in you that you must
dream greatly. Burnham was everlastingly right when he
said : " Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir
men's blood, and probably themselves will not be realized.
Make big plans. Aim high in hope and work, remembering
that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die,
but long after we are gone will be a living thing, asserting
itself with ever growing insistency. Remember that our
sons and grandsons are going to do things that will stagger
us." There is in that the psychology of men in masses.

It is the result of the great dreams of 1893 that Ameri-
[225]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

can cities today lead the world in their park systems.
People think that such a statement is bombast and yet its
complete truth is recognized in other countries.

Mr. Adshead, to whom Mr. Adams referred in an article
on the contribution to city planning made by different
countries, refers to American park systems thus : * " The
scientific provision of recreation is America's most concrete
achievement and it has taken the form of the working up
of parks, playgrounds and open spaces into an organic
system. ... In this connection America has advanced
ahead of any European country. . . . There is also the
intensive use of open spaces, in which the utmost possible
value is extracted from them, as exampled in the play-
ground and neighborhood centers of Chicago, Milwaukee
and other towns. . . . There is also visible a gradation in
the character of the open spaces. There are, for example,
those near the center in the form of small playgrounds and
formal town gardens — the Luxembourg Gardens of Paris
and the Pare, Brussels, illustrate this type. There is then,
further out, the great Town Park, still highly artificial in
its layout — the Prater at Vienna and the Bois de la Cambre
at Brussels are typical examples of this. Finally, there
are the Nature Reserves or stretches of open country left
in their natural state, but prevented from being spoiled by
any building. The wooded hills round at Vienna and the
Foret de Soignes at Brussels are admirable European ex-
amples of the Nature Reserve; but although Vienna and
Brussels, and other European towns, possess to a more or
less extent these types, in no instance can they be seen
definitely joined together in the same way as at Boston,
which represents the highest achievement in this direction
— the Metropolitan Park Commission extending over 38
neighboring cities and towns and including 15,000 acres of
parks and 25 miles of parkways."

I have quoted from Mr. Adshead to show that we must
have more confidence in ourselves. Undoubtedly we have

1 Town Planning Review, July, 1913.
[226]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

much to learn from other countries, but they have some-
thing to learn from us. One thing that we must learn is
that the danger is that we shall under-plan rather than
over-plan.

The financial situation of American cities was referred
to by Mr. Cass Gilbert, with an admonition to economy.
We all recognize the necessity of economy; but there is
an economy which consists in doing without, which is not
real economy. Doing without is penury. It may be ex-
travagance. A city that does without parks and play-
grounds in generous profusion is not economical, but ex-
travagant; it is extravagant of the health and lives of its
men and women workers, and especially of its children who
will be the burden bearers of the next generation. City
planning is often the economy of recognizing the wisdom
of apparent extravagance. Kansas City had a dream in
1893 which undoubtedly appeared extravagant, but the
landowners have realized 300 and 400 per cent out of that
extravagance, though they themselves were compelled to
pay the entire cost, through assessment of special benefits.
The city has realized the wisdom of that extravagance
through increase in income caused by the resulting increase
in assessed valuations.

I deny that the big plans that are prepared today are
too big. I deny a solid foundation for a fear of the future.
It is extraordinary how difficult it is to persuade citizens
that their city is bound to grow. They give lip recognition
to the idea but no practical recognition of it. I presume
that every one of you have found this out. It was im-
pressed upon me at a board meeting of an association in
Philadelphia devoted to city planning propaganda, when I
remarked that during the next administration's term of
office a new city equal to Columbus, Ohio, would be added to
Philadelphia. The statement was not accepted at first but
of course it was easy to prove it. Now you here in Detroit
have grown enormously during the last decade between
1900 and 1910. You grew at the rate of 63 per cent.

[227]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Faith in the future would persuade you that it is part of
wisdom to expect a similar growth during the present dec-
ade. Even though that rate is not maintained, the prepa-
ration of plans for that rate would only be two or three
years out of calculation. You are able to show by a
pamphlet which I have seen since I came here that 39 per
cent of your homes are owned by people who live in them.
I hope that is true. It is a magnificent record, and from
what I have learned of your prosperity I believe that it is
true.

In municipal psychology the dominant note of the last
two decades has not been the creation of parks and play-
ground systems, profound though their effect on the public
has been and will be ; nor the undertaking of civic centers,
although many of them are well on toward completion
today; nor street construction or reconstruction, though
city after city is doing the physical work now — but the
recognition that every city has a future. Patent as that
fact is, it was not squarely recognized in the scheme of
most municipal governments until the last six years. In
1907 the first City Planning Commission was appointed.
Now there are over 100 of them. Whatever the ultimate
form that city planning commissions will take — and, like
all governmental agencies, they wil( necessarily be experi-
mental — this is the gist of their creation : they will con-
tinuously remind the city and the citizens that it is not the
dead past, nor the fleeting present, but the future with all
its vastness that must be their chief concern. This is pro-
foundly significant.

Sometimes in the great endeavor to foresee the future
and to persuade governmental authorities to act upon that
foresight we halt and hesitate; sometimes we wish for the
completed thing, the fact accomplished, the ultimate city.
We err in doing so. The only ultimate city is the city of
the past ; the only city that needs no reconstruction is the
dead city. A great merchant of New York and Philadel-
phia, when just getting his head above water, was accosted

[228]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

in his Chestnut Street store by an irritated customer, with
the remark that he had just been annoyed by the sound of
the carpenters' hammer at work during business hours.
" Yes," said the merchant, " and I hope the sound of the
hammer will never cease." That it has not ceased is a suffi-
cient index of his success. That there is no such thing as
completion is really a great cause for cheer. That the
outer park system of yesterday is the boundary park sys-
tem of today and will be the inner park system of tomorrow
means that today we must acquire the outer park system
of tomorrow, and must plan the ring beyond for the day
after tomorrow.

The necessity of constant reconstruction is not to be
regretted. Reconstruction means renewal of opportunity.

Two or three months ago I inspected the Lincoln me-
morial at Washington, and for a moment wished I could
see the ultimate thing, the pools of water framed by elms
leading up to its majestic beauty; and yet I know that any
one who has had a part, little or big, directly or indirectly,
officially or merely as a part of articulate public opinion,
is getting more joy out of it today than those who will
come tomorrow to see it completed. The builders of the
Pyramids derived more pleasure from them than we do.
There is more recompense in accomplishing than in
accomplishment.

We have thoroughly enjoyed the time that we have had
in Detroit. You have been exceedingly good to us, and
have shown us fully the city which your fathers created.
We praise them for the creation of the Grand Boulevard
of which you today are so justly proud. We praise you
because you are preparing similar plans for the future.
We have been particularly delighted to see these plans for
the creation of a thoroughly organized city, and we hope
and expect that you will carry them out. We from other
cities will be your rivals in the matter of actual accomplish-
ments of similar city plans, but it will be a generous rivalry ;
and when we have the opportunity to come here again to

[229] "

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

enjoy such hospitality as we have enjoyed here tonight, I
beg to assure you that we hope to see many of these plans
realized: and if you have done more than we of other
cities shall have accomplished, we will heartily applaud
you.

[230]

CONFERENCE OF DELEGATES

From National Organizations to Consider City
Planning Cooperation

On Tuesday evening, June 8, 1915, thirty-one delegates,
officially appointed by fourteen national organizations,
met at the Hotel Statler, Detroit, to consider the possibili-
ties of cooperating in extending interest in and knowledge
with regard to city planning.

Mr. Lee J. Ninde of Fort Wayne, Ind., the chairman
of the City Planning Committee of the National Asso-
ciation of Real Estate Exchanges, said that the idea of
such cooperation was suggested to him from the fact that
he had found real estate men generally keenly alive to the
value of city planning but they did not know where to turn
to obtain concrete information on the subject. He said
that much of it existed in the papers and discussions of the
National City Planning Conference, but the conference
has not had the means for editing and disseminating this
information other than in their " Proceedings " and " Bulle-
tin," which have had a limited and special circulation. He
went to some of the members of the National City Planning
Conference, the American Civic Association and the Ameri-
can Institute of Architects to see how they could help him.
One of the first things that was apparent when they came to
consider a plan of action was that much of the valuable ex-
perience and real knowledge of the various matters which
are currently treated in city planning work would be
found among the members of other more specialized or-
ganizations. It was recognized that it would be desirable
to go to such bodies as the

[231]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

American Association of Commercial Organization Secre-
taries
American Federation of Arts
American Institute of Consulting Engineers
American Society of Cemetery Superintendents
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Electrical Engineers
American Society of Landscape Architects
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
American Society of Municipal Improvement
American Society of Park Superintendents
Conference of American Mayors
National Association of Builders Exchanges
National Fire Protection Association
National Housing Association
National Municipal League
National Water Works Association

This suggested the obvious idea of bringing together
those who were already interested in city planning in each
of these bodies to see whether there might not be some way
of organizing cooperation generally among those national
bodies whose subj ects bordered on city planning to the com-
mon end of each helping the others to round out their
knowledge of the subject.

The officers of a number of the bodies above mentioned
were asked if they would consider cooperating in such a
work. The replies showed that the idea was most favorably
received. As the annual meeting on June 7th to 9th of the
National Conference on City Planning seemed a favorable
occasion to bring about a meeting of representatives of
each of the groups, a number of the associations were asked
to send delegations to a conference in Detroit on June 8th.

The thirty-one delegates at this meeting were unanimous
in feeling that there was a great and rapidly growing de-
mand for city planning, and a very general need for proper
education in it. It was felt that a great deal of city plan-

[232]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ning endeavor and zeal was running amuck through lack of
information generally distributed as to what constituted
good practice. They knew that the necessary experience
and ideas existed among the members of their respective
groups but through lack of adequate media for dissemi-
nating them, they often failed to reach those who had the
greatest need of them. They felt that their fellow members
could render a marked public service by contributing from
their knowledge to the general fund of city planning infor-
mation, adapting their ideas for lay consumption and allow-
ing them to be spread broadcast through the magazines,
the press and by various propagandizing bodies.

The delegates were rather afraid that comparatively
few of their fellow members had any clear conception of
what city planning meant or what local city planning bodies
were really trying to do. They felt therefore that prob-
ably education should start at home; that the various
national associations should take it upon themselves to
educate their own members to understand what comprehen-
sive city planning really means, how rapidly it is growing
in importance and, in particular, just what part the mem-
bers of the organizations could and should take in it. For
not only is there a general demand for specific technical
knowledge which only the experts can contribute, but also
these very men are being asked currently as a public duty
to serve on local city plan committees and commissions and
help generally in city planning work in their home towns.
Thus it particularly behooves them to secure such a broad
comprehensive grasp of the subject as will enable them to
successfully lead in the work.

To this end it was most urgently recommended that every-
thing feasible be done, first, to assemble for general distri-
bution the expert knowledge and experience which might
come from the members of the various bodies, and second,
to extend the interest among and round out the knowledge
of the members in all that has to do with city planning. It
was recommended:

[233]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

First. That each association at its next annual conven-
tion devote a session, or even part of a session, to discussing
the subject of city planning, showing the particular relation
it has to the object of the association and showing just
what the members should have to do with the subject both
for their own good and for the good of the general public.

Second. That articles and news items on city planning
matters, edited so that they will have a peculiar appeal
and significance to their readers, be included currently in
the official organs or journals of each organization, and in
such other technical or professional magazines as are read
by the members.

Third. That each official organ or trade journal co-
operate with its respective association to aid it in preparing
city planning articles.

Fourth. That the members cooperate more in the prep-
aration of city planning articles for the general magazines,
the newspapers, for the propagandist work of organiza-
tions like the American Civic Association and that they help
in the campaign of city planning education in the schools
and libraries.

Fifth. That a special committee on city planning be
appointed within each body to treat all of the matters here
discussed and any others that may come up.

Sixth. That each committee send representatives to the
next meeting of the National Conference on City Planning,
there to consider and discuss cooperation among national
organizations and how they may be mutually helpful in
all that pertains to city planning in relation to their re-
spective interests.

Seventh. That each committee confer and cooperate
with the National City Planning Conference in their com-
mon interest and use as far as practicable the facilities of
the conference for the assembling and editing of publish-
able material.

[234]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Eighth. That the Department of the Interior at Wash-
ington be requested to distribute broadcast pamphlets on
city planning and act as an information bureau on city
planning matters.

It was felt that a joint conference would be most neces-
sary to determine what should best be done and in what
order, how to go about it, what part each organization
should take, who would be best suited to do such tasks as
might become necessary, and once the plans were decided
upon, who would go back to the members of the respective
organizations and interpret to them the conference's ideas.

It was generally felt that the whole matter was one of
great importance and urgency and one in which the co-
operation of all was vitally necessary.

George B. Ford,

Chairman pro tern of the joint conference of dele-
gates from national organizations to con-
sider cooperation in city planning matters.

The above is a copy of the statement which has been
sent out by the chairman of the Conference to the Com-
mittee on Plan and Scope, which he was asked to appoint
to consider just what should be done and how. This com-
mittee consists of the following:

American Institute of Architects

Frederick L. Ackerman, 62 W. 45th St., New York City.
Commission of Conservation of Canada

Thomas Adams, Ottawa, Can.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers

Charles Whiting Baker, Editor, Engineering News, W. 36th
St., New York City.
American Society of Municipal Improvement

Harland Bartholomew, Firemen's Building, Newark, N. J.
National Association of Builders Exchanges

Charles A. Bowen, Detroit, Mich.
Conference of American Mayors

W. P. Capes, 105 E. 22d St., New York City.
American Society of Cemetery Superintendents

Frank Eurich, Detroit, Mich.
[235]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

American Society of Civil Engineers

Henry W. Hodge, 149 Broadway, New York City.

National Water Works Association

Nicholas S. Hill, Jr., 100 William St., New York City.
National Fire Protection Association

Robert D. Kohn, 56 W. 45th St., New York City.

American Institute of Consulting Engineers

Charles W. Leavitt, 220 Broadway, New York City.

American Federation of Arts

Miss Leila Mechlin, Secretary, Washington, D. C.

American Society of Electrical Engineers

Ralph Merschan, 80 Maiden Lane, New York City.

National Association of Real Estate Exchanges
Lee J. Ninde, Fort Wayne, Ind.

National City Planning Conference

Frederick L. Olmsted, Brookline, Mass.

American Society of Park Superintendents
George A. Parker, Hartford, Conn.

American Society of Landscape Architects
T. Glenn Phillips, Detroit, Mich.

National Association of Commercial Organization Secretaries

Howard Strong, Civic & Commerce Association, Minneapolis,
Minn.

National Housing Association

Lawrence D. Veiller, 105 E. 22d St., New York City.

American Civic Association

Richard B. Watrous, Union Trust Building, Washington, D.C.

National Municipal League

Clinton Rogers Woodruff, 121 So. Broad St., Philadelphia, Pa.

Member ex officio

George B. Ford, Municipal Building, New York City.

The members of this committee have the matter now
under consideration and it is hoped that during the coming
months a plan of action will be determined upon.

It is not the intention in any way whatsoever to form a
new city planning organization apart from the National
City Planning Conference. It is the intention in the scheme
above outlined to extend and supplement the range of

[236]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

activity and usefulness of the National City Planning Con-
ference, and it is the intention that this newly formed com-
mittee shall cooperate with the Committee on Publicity and
Public Information of the National City Planning Confer-
ence of which Mr. Richard B. Watrous is chairman.

The following societies were represented at the conference of delegates:

National City Planning Conference.

American Civic Association.

American Institute of Architects.

American Institute of Consulting Engineers.

American Society of Civil Engineers.

American Society of Landscape Architects.

American Society of Civil Engineers.

American Society of Landscape Architects.

American Society of Municipal Improvements.

National Association of Builders' Exchanges.

National Association of Real Estate Exchanges.

National Conference of Mayors and other City Officials.

National Fire Protection Association.

National Housing Association.

Commission of Conservation of Canada.

[237]

BUSINESS SESSION

BUSINESS SESSION

The conference met in executive session at half-past
four on Wednesday, June 9, Mr. Frederick L. Olmsted
presiding.

RESOLUTIONS OF THANKS

Resolved, That we express to the mayor, official boards
and people of Detroit our appreciation of the complete
manner in which they have entertained the conference. The
generous help which they have given and the personal at-
tention of many citizens have made this one of the pleas-
antest and most successful of our meetings. Our sincere
thanks are hereby tendered. We also wish to thank the
Detroit press for their kindly interest and assistance.

Resolved, That the thanks of the conference be tendered
to Walter Campbell and to the company represented by him
for the use of their splendid new steamboat on Tuesday.
We greatly appreciate this exceptional opportunity to see
the Detroit River. No item of hospitality was omitted
from start to finish.

Resolved, That a vote of thanks be tendered to the City
Plan and Improvement Commission of Detroit, of which
Charles Moore is chairman and T. Glenn Phillips is secre-
tary, for the leading part it has assumed and so success-
fully borne in the preparation for the management of this
conference.

Resolved, That we transmit to the Board of Commerce
of Detroit our thanks for their hospitality to us on Mon-
day and our sincere appreciation of their cooperation and
help throughout the conference, which so materially con-
tributed to its success.

[241]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

ORGANIZATION OF THE EIGHTH CONFERENCE

At the opening session of the conference a nominating
committee was appointed which submitted nominations for
both the executive and general committees. Additions to
the latter were made from the floor.

Voted: That the report of the committee on nomina-
tions, as amended by nominations from the floor, be
accepted.

Voted: That the executive committee be authorized to
add one to its number from the city at which the next
conference shall be held.

Executive Committee

Frederick Law Olmsted, Fellow American Society of
Landscape Architects, Brookline, Mass., Chairman.

Nelson P. Lewis, Chief Engineer Board of Estimate and
Apportionment, New York City, Vice-Chairman.

George E. Hooker, Secretary City Club, Chicago.

Lawrence Veiller, Secretary and Director National
Housing Association, New York City.

Andrew Wright Crawford, Esq., Philadelphia.

Hon. Lawson Purdy, President Department Taxes and
Assessments, New York City.

Charles Moore, Detroit, Mich.

E. P. Goodrich, Consulting Engineer, New York City.

John Nolen, Landscape Architect, Cambridge, Mass.

Edward H. Bennett, Consultant in City Planning,
Chicago.

Richard B. Watrous, Secretary American Civic Associ-
ation, Washington, D. C.

George S. Webster, Chief Engineer, Philadelphia.

Thomas Adams, Town Planning Adviser, Commission of
Conservation, Ottawa, Canada.

George B. Ford, Architect and Consultant in City Plan-
ning, New York City.

[242]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Henry C. Weight, New York City.

Lee J. Ninde, Chairman City Planning Committee, Na-
tional Association of Real Estate Exchanges, Fort
Wayne, Ind.

A. L. Brockway, Architect, Syracuse, N. Y.

W. Templeton Johnson, Architect, San Diego, Cal.
Alfred Bettman, Esq., Cincinnati, Ohio.

General Committee

Hon. George McAneny New York City

Arnold W. Brunner New York City

B. A. Haldeman Philadelphia

Allen B. Pond Chicago

Frank B. Williams, Esq, New York City

Richard M. Hurd New York City

W. F. Dummer Chicago

T. Glenn Phillips Detroit

Howard Strong Minneapolis

John Ihlder New York City

George E. Kessler St. Louis

Maj. Joseph W. Shirley Baltimore

A. A. Stoughton Winnipeg

Meyer Lissner Los Angeles

James D. Phelan San Francisco

Paul L. Feiss Cleveland

Munson Havens , Cleveland

A. C. Comey Cambridge, Mass.

Charles Mulford Robinson Rochester

Vincent S. Stevens Akron, Ohio

Col. D. N. Foster Fort Wayne, Ind.

Prof. Aubrey Tealdi Ann Arbor, Mich.

Eli D. Hofeller Buffalo

Edward M. Bassett, Esq New York City

John C. Dana Newark

J. C. Murphy Louisville

J. C. Nichols Kansas City, Mo.

George B. Longan Kansas City, Mo.

[243]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

J. P. Hynes . Toronto

Henry A. Barker Providence, R. I.

Paul A. Harsch Toledo

Robert W. Hemphill, Jr Ypsilanti, Mich.

Richard Waterman Washington

Morris Knowles Pittsburgh

S. S. Kresge Detroit

George B. Dealey Dallas, Tex.

King G. Thompson Columbus, Ohio

R. C. Sturgis Boston

Charles H. Cheney Berkeley, Cal.

M. N. Baker Montclair, N. J.

Duncan McDuffie Berkeley, Cal.

Henry Wright St. Louis

Edward A. Filene Boston

0. C. Simonds Chicago

Dr. J. E. Peairs Pueblo, Colo.

Edward H. Bouton Baltimore

Hon. Fred W. Keller South Bend, Ind.

Maj. Charles W. Kutz Washington

L. S. Smith Madison, Wis.

R. M. Hattie . Halifax

Invitations to the Conference for 1915

Invitations were received from Cleveland, Richmond, St.
Louis, Atlantic City, Memphis, Baltimore, San Francisco.

Voted: That the executive committee be authorized to
select the meeting place for 1916.

[244 ]

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

REPORT OF CONFERENCE COMMITTEE
On " Best Methods of Land Subdivision "

Introduction

At the last conference, held in Toronto, a special com-
mittee was appointed to investigate the prevailing methods
of land subdivision in the various parts of the United
States and to present to this conference a report of their
findings. An outline of the information desired, and sug-
gested methods of procuring the same, were submitted to
committees in various cities; and this report comprises an
analysis of the information submitted by them. The fol-
lowing municipalities have reported:

Berkeley, Cal. Louisville, Ky.

Boston, Mass. Montreal, Que.

Bridgeport, Conn. New York, N. Y.

Brookline, Mass. Newark, N. J.

Chicago, 111. Philadelphia, Pa.

Cleveland, Ohio Syracuse, N. Y.

Detroit, Mich. Vancouver, B. C.

Kansas City, Mo. Washington, D. C.

and much information has been extracted from a paper by
Lawrence Veiller, submitted to the Third National Con-
ference on City Planning, held in Philadelphia in 1911.

While the request for information comprised seven char-
acteristics concerning which information was desired with
reference to the subdivision plan, six statements of con-
ditions as to dates, values, topography, etc., and four
points as to physical, social and financial results, not
enough information was obtainable from the various cities
to make it possible to report comprehensibly with regard to

[247]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

each of these items. In some instances deductions have
been drawn from the reports of only a single city with
regard to the various subjects considered in this report
along the following lines :

1. Lot size

(a) Typical dimensions

(o) Change tendencies

(c) Effect of size on buildings

(d) Effect of size on values

(e) Effect of restrictions
(/) Alleys

(g) Standards

2. Streets

Effect of width, character, direction, amount
of travel, transportation facilities.

Under each topic will first be given extracts from the
various city reports, followed by a resume and the con-
clusions which have been deduced by the reporter.

Data

LOT SIZE
BERKELEY, CAL. Hillegas Block

The blocks were made 319 feet deep by 600 feet long. These blocks
were subdivided into lots 50 by 159.45 feet, but these latter sub-
divisions were not adhered to when the sale of the land was started.
Some bought lots wider than 50 feet, while others bought narrower
lots. With a few exceptions the lots 40 feet wide have been used,
even in places where a choice as to the width was given.

BOSTON, MASS.

A most interesting example of a business block is shown in Fig.
23,1 a typical block in the heart of the Boston retail district. The
original lots were 50 to 80 feet wide and 250 to 300 feet deep. The
modern map shows the effect of continued division of the lots, leav-
ing many of the units only 15 to 25 feet wide and between 50 and 65
feet deep. The counter tendency, also modern, due to the need for
larger areas for larger buildings, is shown in the northwest corner.

1 Sketch accompanying report of a local committee.
[248]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

BROOKLINE, MASS.

The town engineer's office of Brookline has on file copies of all
plattings of land in Brookline which are on file at the registry of
deeds, 2959 in number, and in addition 834 such plans not recorded
at the registry. An examination of all these plans shows that they
may be classified as follows:

First. 712 subdivision plans which cover considerable areas and
in which it is apparent that the depth of the lots was a matter of
choice, since different depths could have been secured without af-
fecting previously existing streets or outside properties.

Second. 336 subdivision plans covering only a few lots each and
where the depths of the lots appear to have been practically fixed
by the size and shape of the whole parcel and by the location of exist-
ing streets.

Third. 525 plans of subdivisions of such irregular or abnormal
sort that the lot sizes cannot readily be classified by width and
depth.

Fourth. 1720 plans which are not subdivision plans at all but
show one lot each or adjustments of boundaries, etc.

The 712 plans of the first class have been examined and the lot
sizes classified as shown by Table No. 1.

CHICAGO, ILL.

The blocks of the original town (1832) of Chicago were divided
into 80 foot lots generally. There were a few 30, 50 and 60 foot
lots west of the river. The original lot lines were kept for the
most part as long as the lots were used for residence purposes, al-
though often split into two or three lots for one residence.

As the city grew these residence lots changed into business, and
with this change came the resubdivision of the blocks, not by the city
but by the owners. A man wishing to build a store or factory figured
how much property was required and made arrangements to acquire
it, often getting probably 15 feet on one side and say 10 feet on the
other. This condition has gone on until today there is very little
trace of the original lot layout to be found in the business section.
(The fire in 1871 may have had something to do with this condi-
tion, but there was some tendency toward this before the fire.)

The first additions to Chicago made before 1850 were laid out
into 50 foot lots as a standard.

Coming down to the later subdivisions which are at present in or
near the center of the city, there are two distinct types used: one
on the north and west sides, the other on the south side. On the
north and west sides the lots were between 20 and 30 feet. On the
south side the lots were 75 to 80 feet.

In the original town, with the first extensions thereto, the depth of

[249]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the typical 80 and 50 foot lots were generally from 160 to 180 feet,
with a few lots as small as 130 feet.

The depth of the present day typical lot is 125 feet. This has been
the standard depth for more than forty years.

CLEVELAND, OHIO

In the plans submitted, one refers to a section of the city in the
heart of the business district, and the other one to a block in the
residence district. You will notice that in each case there was in-
sufficient provision for cross streets, that the blocks were too long
and the lots too deep, so that in each case resubdividing was neces-
sary in order to make the land available.

Except in the more expensive residence districts, there seems now
locally to be a tendency to adopt a lot size of from 40 to 50 feet front-
age and from 100 to 150 feet in depth, depending somewhat upon the
extent of the land to be developed. A number of allotments are sup-
plied with 35 foot lots, but the majority are somewhat greater in
frontage.

DETROIT, MICH.

What are the best standard lot dimensions used and practical for
Detroit?

Our answer would be, that the standard size for central residence
properties for Detroit are 50 feet front, with a depth varying from
100 to 190 feet, with a 20 foot alley or lane running across the rear.

Wage earners' lots, platted just inside and outside of the city limits,
are generally 30 feet front by 100 to 125 feet in depth, with a 20 foot
alley running across the rear.

KANSAS CITY, MO.

The original subdivision shows the typical narrow, deep lot platted
and used so much in Kansas City at one period, but which has
practically been abandoned in residence additions. It will be seen
that none of the better houses on Harrison Street used single lots.
On Campbell Street, where the houses were less pretentions, the
small lot was used.

LOUISVILLE, KY.

This committee early came to the conclusion that our present city
lots are too deep. 200 feet is the depth of the original city blocks,
but blocks have been made of lesser depth in land subdivision by
private owners in later years, even to the extreme of 100 feet in a few
cases. We might say, however, that the minimum depth has been
due to physical conditions that were insurmountable; generally the
strips of land being subdivided were too narrow to provide deeper

[250]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

lots. We have seen in the block we are studying that although the
original lots were 200 feet deep, their owners cut them in two, mak-
ing the lots 100 feet deep. This is well below the average depth, but
we see that even this extreme has proven to be the more desirable,
as shown by the block in question.

While we are convinced that our lots are too deep for residence and
ordinary business purposes, we are still groping for light and hope
as a result of the experience collected by the general committee to
be able to adopt something that will prove to be more satisfactory.

NEW YORK, N. Y.

The lot units are uniformly 100 feet deep and 25 feet wide in Man-
hattan and the Bronx and 20 feet wide in Brooklyn, Queens and
Richmond.

NEWARK, N. J.

The prevailing lot size in Newark has been 25 by 100 feet. There
are, however, numerous other subdivisions, especially of size 20 by
100 feet.

SYRACUSE, N. Y.

Village of Salina, surveyed in 1798, and laid out in 16 squares of
396 feet on a side, and each square containing 4 lots, 198 by 198 feet.

Later, when this area was further developed for residential pur-
poses, the depth of the majority of the lots averaged 99 to 198 feet,
while the frontages varied from 22 to 198 feet, with a general average
of 493^ to 33, 66, 100 and 40 feet.

This subdivision has varied but little for the last fifty years, except
for the development of the industrial lots in the north and west.

On the 1834 map of Syracuse the average large lot measurements
are 140 by 485 feet, and the small ones 66 by 132 feet.

In the university section, which is now practically all built up,
the prevailing sizes of lots average 50, 60, 66, 80 feet, and a good
number 100 feet, while in depth 132 and 165 feet predominate.

In certain cheaper lands subdivisions have been made previous to
1900 in which are found many lots of 33 feet width, varying in depth
from 87^ to 150 feet, 132 foot lots predominating.

On investigation of more recent subdivisions it was found that out
of 11 examined, 5 showed an average of lots 40 by 120 feet, two 50
by 150 feet, and one each of 33 by 120 feet, 40 by 140 feet, 40 by
107 feet, and 40 by 143 feet.

VEILLER, LAWRENCE

What, it may be asked, is the general practice in America today
with regard to each of these important points? How have our streets
been laid out in our leading cities?

[251]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

The only answer that can be made to these questions is that there
is no general plan. The practice varies through infinite degrees in
each city. In order to determine what the practice was, a question-
naire was sent recently to all cities in the United States having over
one hundred thousand population according to the latest census
returns. This included the fifty largest cities in the United States.
Definite returns to the questionnaire were received from the follow-
ing forty-six cities: Albany, Atlanta, Boston, Bridgeport, Buffalo,
Cambridge, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton,
Denver, Detroit, Fall River, Grand Rapids, Indianapolis, Jersey City,
Kansas City, Los Angeles, Louisville, Lowell, Memphis, Milwaukee,
Newark, New Haven, New Orleans, New York, Omaha, Paterson,
N. J., Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Providence, Richmond, Rochester,
San Francisco, Scranton, Seattle, Spokane, St. Louis, St. Paul, Syra-
cuse, Toledo, Washington, Worcester, Nashville and Portland, Ore.

The depth of lot, if one can judge from the information thus re-
ceived, seems to vary from 50 to 200 feet. In the great majority of
cities the lots exceed 100 feet in depth. In only three cases is the
usual depth of lot less than 100 feet, namely, in the cities of Phila-
delphia, where it ranges from 40 feet upward, in Lowell, Mass.,
where it ranges from 80 to 150 feet, and Washington, where it ranges
from 50 to 100 feet. In twenty-five cases, or over one-half of all
the cities, the usual lot is 125 feet or over. In nine cases, or one-fifth
of all, the usual depth of lot is 150 feet or over.

Berkeley .
Boston . .

Bridgeport
Brookline .
Chicago . .
Cleveland .
Detroit . .
Kansas City
Louisville .
New York .

Newark . .
Philadelphia

Syracuse .

Veiller . .

Resume"

50 X 159.45

50 to 80 X 250 to 300 originally; 15 to 25 X 50
to 65 now

30, 40 to 50 X 100 (125 few)

40 to 60 X 90 to 100 (majority)

50 to 80 X 160 to 180; 25 to 75 X 125 today

40 to 50 X 100 to 150; few 35

50 X 100 to 190; 30 X 100 to 125

25 X 150 and larger

— X 200 at first; — X 100 of late

25 X 100 Manhattan, Bronx; 20 X 100 Brook-
lyn, Queens, Richmond

25 X 100; few 20 X 100

14 to 16 X 45 to 125 mostly; 19 to 22 X 75 to 105
few

200 X 200, 33 to 100 X 100 to 200; 140 X 486,
66 X 132; 40 X 120, 5 out of 11 lots

46 cities, — X 50 to 200; 25 more than 125; 9
more than 150
[252]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Conclusions

Philadelphia is in a class by itself, 15 X 60 average.

New England (Boston, Brookline) is irregular but tending toward,

40 to 60 X 90 to 100.
New York (and Newark), 20 to 25 X 100.
Middle and Western cities with later tendencies toward reduction

in both dimensions, 50 X 150 average.

LOT SIZE CHANGE TENDENCIES
BOSTON, MASS.

A most interesting example of a business block is shown in Fig.
23,1 a typical block in the heart of the Boston retail district.

The original lots were 50 to 80 feet wide and 250 to 300 feet deep.
The modern map shows the effect of continued division of the lots,
leaving many of the units only 15 to 25 feet wide and between 50
and 65 feet deep. The counter tendency, also modern, due to the
need for larger areas for larger buildings, is shown in the northwest
corner.

BROOKLINE, MASS.

The remaining lots of the original subdivision, between Walnut
and Boylston streets on higher ground and a little further from the
village, were in 1859 still 70 feet or more in width, but where they
were originally more than 170 feet deep from street to street new lots
100 feet deep facing on Boylston Street had been cut off the rear end
of them.

With few exceptions the lots running through from street to street
have been cut in two, or at least occupied by independent buildings
on the two frontages, even where the distance from street to street
is only 80 feet, making lots only 40 feet deep.

There has been a tendency, under the exigencies of use, to convert
the lots shown on the filed plats into shallower and wider parcels.
Omitting the irregular corner parcels in each case, the average width
and depth of the platted lots, as per Diagram 2, of 1859 is about
353^ by 783^ feet; of the lots in 1913, as per ownership lines on
Diagram 3, about 43 by 78 feet; or reckoning a separate lot for each
independent building having a frontage on the street where two or
more are held by the same owner, the lots of 1913 average about
40H by 76 feet.

CHICAGO, ILL.

As the city grew these residence lots changed into business, and
with this change came the resubdivision of the blocks, not by the

1 Sketch accompanying local committee report,
r OKQ n

[253]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

city but by the owners. A man wishing to build a store or factory
figured how much property was required and made arrangements to
acquire it, often getting probably 15 feet on one side and say 10 feet
on the other. This condition has gone on until today there is very
little trace of the original lot layout to be found in the business sec-
tion. (The fire in 1871 may have had something to do with this con-
dition, but there was some tendency toward this before the fire.)
This may be due to some extent to the size of the lots, which were
too large for ordinary use in a smaller town.

The first additions to Chicago made before 1850 were laid out
into 50 foot lots as a standard. This was probably due to the fact
that the 80 foot lots were too large for general uses. These 50 foot
lots have passed through much the same development as the 80 foot
lots of the original town, and the same line of reasoning can be used
in this case.

On the north and west sides the lots were between 20 and 30 feet.
These lots even today are intact, although often a single building
may occupy as high as four or five of these small lots. However,
where the business has pushed into this district it has not overrun
the lot lines to any great extent. On the south side the lots were
75 to 80 feet. These lots often proved to be too large and the re-
sult is they were broken up into smaller lots.

The depth of the present day typical lot is 125 feet. This has been
the standard depth for more than forty years.

LOUISVILLE, EY.

This committee early came to the conclusion that our present city
lots are too deep. 200 feet is the depth of the original city blocks,
but blocks have been made of lesser depth in land subdivision by
private owners in later years, even to the extreme of 100 feet in a few
cases. We might say, however, that the minimum depth has been
due to physical conditions that were insurmountable; generally the
strips of land being subdivided were too narrow to provide deeper
lots. We have seen in the block we are studying that although the
original lots were 200 feet deep, their owners cut them in two, mak-
ing the lots 100 feet deep. This is well below the average depth, but
we see that even this extreme has proven to be the more desirable,
as shown by the block in question.

PHILADELPHIA, PA.

The development of the one family house in Philadelphia is especi-
ally interesting. In the early growth of the city houses four stories
high with deep lots were built in solid blocks; as the city was extended
this type of dwelling gave way to the three story one upon a smaller
lot, and still later the two story house came largely into vogue. With

[254]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the change in the type of house there was a corresponding change
in the size of the lot, the change being almost invariably toward
shallower depths for the row houses. Today the tendency in some
sections of the city is to erect the row house upon the shallowest lot
permitted.

SYRACUSE, N. Y.

On the 1834 map of Syracuse the average large lot measurements
are 140 by 485 feet, and the small ones 66 by 132 feet.

On investigation of more recent subdivisions it was found that out
of 11 examined, 5 showed an average of lots 40 by 120 feet, two 50
by 150 feet, and one each of 33 by 120 feet, 40 by 140 feet, 40 by
107 feet, and 40 by 143 feet.

Resume

Brookline . . . 90 to 100 large majority; 76 special study majority
Chicago . . . .125 standard (for 40 years) ; 80 and 50 feet width

split; 20 to 30 retained
Louisville ... Reducing down to 100 depth
New York . . . 100 standard (no change for over 100 years)
Newark .... 100 standard

Philadelphia . . Deep tending to shallowest possible (45?)
Syracuse . . .128 average of 11 late additions

Conclusions

General tendency shown toward reduction in depth, except New York
(Newark) and Chicago at 100 and 125 respectively, 100 and 40
year standards.

Cities which had lots deeper than 100 tending toward that figure.

New England with its irregular size tending below 100.

Philadelphia tending to smallest possible.

Widths in all places (except Philadelphia) tend down to about
30, while larger and wider than 20 are recommended every-
where.

EFFECT OF LOT SIZE ON TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT

BERKELEY, CAL. Hillegas Block

A peculiarity of this block is its excessive depth of lots. This was
necessary because the block was made too wide, and as only two rows
of houses could be secured, the depth of lot adopted was necessarily
large. The excess of land, after the house on each lot was built, was
not used for agricultural or any other purposes, which might either

[255]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

have brought additional revenue or added beauty to the surround-
ings. The reason probably was that the area was too large to be
taken care of properly by the owner.

Due to the excessive depth of these lots, whose excess land could
not be used for any purpose, rear houses have been erected. These
houses are just as large and of the same character as the front
houses.

In lots 40 feet wide and 159.48 feet deep there has been a tendency
to build one and even two rear houses.

Lots 96 feet deep have answered the purpose well for the build-
ing of one residence only.

CHICAGO, ILL.

A man wishing to build a store or factory figured how much prop-
erty was required and made arrangements to acquire it, often get-
ting probably 15 feet on one side and say 10 feet on the other. This
condition has gone on until today there is very little trace of the
original lot layout to be found in the business section. (The fire in
1871 may have had something to do with this condition, but there
was some tendency toward this before the fire.) This may be due
in some extent to the size of the lots, which were too large for ordinary
use in a smaller town. Yet when the town grew this splitting which
occurred may have been merely the fact that a man wanted a cer-
tain amount of property and got it in any way possible.

The first additions to Chicago made before 1850 were laid out into
50 foot lots as a standard. This was probably due to the fact that
the 80 foot lots were too large for general uses. These 50 foot lots
have passed through much the same development as the 80 foot
lots of the original town and the same line of reasoning can be used
in this case.

On the north and west sides the lots were between 20 and 30 feet.
These lots even today are intact, although often a single building
may occupy as high as four or five of these small lots. The reason
for the retention of the original lot lines may be the smallness of the
lots, or it may be in the fact that even today most of this property
is used for residence and not for business. However, where the busi-
ness has pushed into this district it has not overrun the lot lines to
any great extent. On the south side the lots were 75 to 80 feet.
These lots often proved to be too large and the result is they were
broken up into smaller lots.

For the poorer residential districts the depth of 125 feet is not
economical. There are many cases where houses have been built two
or three deep in these lots and quite commonly a store occupies the
front of the lot and a dwelling the rear. The depth of lot, therefore,
depends upon the occupancy.

[256]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

CLEVELAND, OHIO

From local observations it seems to be true that when lots are made
too large it seems to depreciate the property, inviting as it does the
building of buildings in the rear of the lot, as the property is no longer
in demand for first class residence purposes. These buildings in the
rear of course tend toward congestion and improper building con-
ditions.

KANSAS CITY, MO.

The excessive width of the block (nearly 450 feet) has resulted in
the past few years in Van Trump Court, a private way with five cheap
apartment houses, and Cherry Lane, a platted "dead end" street
serving three duplex houses of a rather good class.

The original subdivision shows the typical 25 foot deep lot platted
and used so much in Kansas City at one period, but which has prac-
tically been abandoned in residence additions. It will be seen that
none of the better houses on Harrison Street used single lots. On
Campbell Street, where the houses were less pretentious, the small
lot was used.

LOUISVILLE, KY. _ _

As a result of the great depth of lot, purchasers have bought as
few front feet as possible and there have developed different classes of
narrow, rather long houses. In nearly all cases in Louisville we build
single detached dwellings; consequently, when building a detached
dwelling on a narrow lot, you have an attenuated affair that must
depend for light and air on windows opening into narrow, more or
less dark and damp passages. Occasionally in the older portions of
the city you will find what is locally called a " double " house, a
house open to the front and back but with a blank dividing wall
through the center. Such houses therefore can get light from one
side only. As this type of house was generally built three or more
rooms deep and on narrow lots, we find the troubles of the single
house in more intensified form. The inner rooms are dark and there
is a lack of air and freshness. Seldom do we find a block of more
than two houses attached. In recent years we have the apartment
house in all styles and grades, from the converted two or three story
single dwelling of former times to the large modern structure of
thirty to forty apartments.

In the business portion of the city we find the same general ob-
jection to the narrow lot that is found in the residence section. A
very deep narrow shop with congestion at entrance and dulness at
the distant rear. In order to get any considerable frontage, which
in most branches is extremely valuable by reason of the opportunity
it gives to display goods to the public, the shopkeeper is forced to

[257]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the expediency of taking two or more lots, which leaves unused space
in the rear. This obviously is a most uneconomical method.

The shortening of lots will no doubt have a tendency to widen them,
and do it without unduly increasing the cost of the land. More
streets for frontage, combined with fewer and narrower cross or con-
necting streets, would enable the landowner to do this without a
burden on the purchaser and we would have districts that would
more nearly retain their value. Under present conditions where a
block has been built up we invariably find the same uninviting pas-
sages that have a depressing effect on property values, as they impel
the residents to abandon their undesirable houses and move out
into the newer sections. This tendency is a great economic waste;
it reduces the income of the property owner, reduces the city's revenue
from taxation and we soon have, if not a slum, at least a most un-
inviting section that is always retrogressing.

NEW YORK CITY

These widths of blocks are not at all binding in practice, as the
lots have been recombined in all sorts of combinations. The results
are that we find houses built on lots only 12 feet wide and 100 feet
deep, in places.

The minimum practicable lot width for tenements under the pres-
ent tenement law has become 373^ feet for five and six story tene-
ments or 25 feet for three and four story tenements.

NEWARK, N. J.

It would seem that in establishing these arbitrary standard lot
sizes, which prevail in other cities as well as in Newark, we have
worked backwards, for in establishing a lot dimension, particularly
width, we at once determine to a large extent the structure which
must go upon that lot, whereas it would seem to be more logical to
regulate the size of lot after having determined the character and
best dimensions for the particular structure which is to be built
thereon. For dwelling purposes it has been found that detached
structures are usually best when lot widths are 25 feet or over —
conditions are generally bad when the width is less. A width of 30
feet is advisable. The width of dwellings which adjoin each other
should be no less than 20 feet — this would provide for walls, hall
and one room — so that only in the case of adjoining dwellings
would a subdivision of 20 feet be recommended, and this in turn could
profitably be increased to 24 or 25 feet.

With regard to depth of subdivision, it has been found that many
of the worst housing conditions in Newark have occurred upon
what originally were lots having a depth of 100 feet, due to the fact
that the depth has been altered and so-called back lot structures
have been erected.

[258]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

PHILADELPHIA, PA.

Our studies indicate the present tendencies of land development
in Philadelphia and these tendencies are in some respects unfor-
tunate.

The development of the one family house in Philadelphia is es-
pecially interesting. In the early growth of the city, houses four
stories high with deep lots were built in solid blocks; as the city
was extended this type of dwelling gave way to the three story one
upon a smaller lot and still later the two story house came largely
into vogue. With the change in the type of house there was a cor-
responding change in the size of the lot, the change being almost
invariably toward shallower depths for the row houses. Today the
tendency in some sections of the city is to erect the row house upon
the shallowest lot permitted.

Some of the early four story houses, which were large and sub-
stantial, are now used as boarding houses, apartment houses or
lodging houses, and some have been converted to business uses with-
out any change of lot lines, alterations of the fronts and interiors be-
ing made to accommodate them to the new use. This occurs in
practically every section of the city where local business is encouraged.

Our Study No. 1 1 shows a section in the suburb of Germantown
where the properties were originally quite large and were occupied
by large mansions. The growth of urban improvements in the
vicinity has driven out families who originally occupied this sec-
tion and the large properties are now being subdivided and con-
verted to the uses of the smaller house as indicated in the study.
This form of conversion of use is increasing in some sections of the
city.

The attention of your committee is called particularly to Study
No. 5,1 which shows considerable variety in the form of the develop-
ment, which is an original and comparatively recent one. This study
also indicates a method of original subdivision of a large property
which now very seldom occurs, as the present practice is for builders
to buy a block or more of property, subdivide it into the small lots,
erect small houses and sell the properties to individual home owners
or investors.

Study No. 16 * shows the manner in which property is developed
into the two story flats, which are becoming popular in certain parts
of the city, especially in West Philadelphia, and you will notice that
these subdivisions are in form similar to the practice of erecting the
one family house and the buildings erected upon them are similar
in character to the two story one family house. We do not know
of the existence of improvements of this particular type in any other
city.

1 Sketches accompanying local committee report.

[259]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

WASHINGTON, D. C.

I will say that I have selected a square that for years has been
known as Willow Tree Alley. It is a large square, located near the
Botanical Gardens and only a few blocks from the Capitol itself.
For a good many years it has been known as one of the worst dis-
tricts in Washington, with very congested conditions and small
houses, in which lived a dangerous and criminal class of people. The
square was so large that there were many interior alleys, some known
as blind alleys. A few years ago, by congressional enactment, the
interior of that square was bought, buildings cleared away and there
is now a very fine playground there, leaving the square in this present
shape a line of residences on the four sides of the square, the in-
terior being an entirely open space for playground purposes, sur-
rounded by ornamental fences which have been tastefully decorated
with plants and vines. The effect has been to eliminate the bad class
of population and to make the square now a center for the children
in the daytime and for the adults in the evening. It is in a section
of the city in which the negroes are the prevailing population.

VEILLER, LAWRENCE

But the far more important determination is the distance between
streets: namely, the lot plan and the block plan. To the deep lot
we can trace most of our housing evils so far as they relate to land
overcrowding.

Resume

Berkeley . . . Lots 150 feet deep produce rear houses

Brookline . . . Lots even 70 to 80 feet (chiefly above 100) have
had rear buildings erected

Chicago . . . . 125 feet depth not economical for poor residential
districts; 80 feet width too large for general
use, even 50 feet is split and redivided, 20 to 30
foot lots being retained

Cleveland . . . "Too large" (deep) lots tend to rear buildings
with congestion and depression of value

Kansas City . . Good residences use wider than 25 feet, poorer
ones use 25 feet width

Louisville . . . Deep lots lead to narrow ones with dark houses,
and bad shaped stores; narrow lots with rear
dwellings are depressed in value

New York . . . Less than 100 feet impracticable for lofts, offices,
apartments; also gives bad tenements because
no open space in center of block. More than
100 gives narrow bad tenement courts

[260]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Newark .... Lot width tends to determine class of structure.
Narrow lots — narrow houses. 100 feet affords
room for rear tenements

Philadelphia . . Single house tendency has dictated lot size, un-
fortunately. In conversion to business use
original lot lines usually followed, although
often ignored

Veiller .... Most housing troubles due to deep lots

Conclusions

Lot area seems to be the original determining factor. Deep lots are
made narrow; narrow lots lead to narrow buildings — bad for
residence or business. Deep lots even down to 70 to 80 feet
tend toward having rear buildings — often residences. These
conditions lead toward congestion with lowered values.

Except in Philadelphia, lot size has generally influenced building
size and number per lot. In Philadelphia desire for single family
house has developed small size of lot.

EFFECT OF LOT AND INCIDENTAL BUILDING SIZE ON
REAL ESTATE VALUES

BERKELEY, CAL. Hillegas Block

Due to the excessive depth of these lots, whose excess land could
not be used for any purpose, rear houses have been erected. These
houses are just as large and of the same character as the front houses.
Investigation also shows that whenever two or more houses are built
on the same lot these belong to the same proprietor.

The value of land has increased considerably since the subdivision
of the tract was made. In 1862 the price of land around the Hillegas
Tract was $100 per acre. Today it is a hundred times as much.
This is probably due to the topographical location of the block in
question, and to the great demand of land in this site.

The value of the land increases as we approach the market cen-
ters and decreases as we recede from them.

BROOKLINE, MASS.

It is probable that the average land value for the town increased
between 250 and 300 per cent from 1874 to 1913 as compared with
an increase of 30 to 40 per cent in the White Farm district. This
small increase appears to have been due mainly to the fact that most
of the district was largely occupied at the earlier date in such a
manner that a low price was almost the only means by which
purchasers could be attracted.

[261]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

LOUISVILLE, KY.

The building of a cheaper class of dwellings in the alleys such as
has resulted in the block under consideration is quite common in
Louisville, resulting in an unsanitary condition of affairs that is not
only prejudicial to the physical but to the moral health of localities
in which it exists.

The shortening of lots will no doubt have a tendency to widen them
and do it without unduly increasing the cost of the land. More
streets for frontage, combined with fewer and narrower cross or con-
necting streets, would enable the landowner to do this without a
burden on the purchaser and we would have districts that would
more nearly retain their value. Under present conditions where a
block has been built up we invariably find the same uninviting pas-
sages that have a depressing effect on property values, as they impel
the residents to abandon their undesirable houses and move out into
the newer sections. This tendency is a great economic waste; it
reduces the income of the property owner, reduces the city's revenue
from taxation and we soon have, if not a slum, at least a most unin-
viting section that is always retrogressing.

NEW YORK CITY

We took a typical block and drew it out at the same scale for five
different periods.

In 1853 the rear portions of the deep lots were used for wash houses
or small work houses, but we want particularly to have you note the
unrestricted intensive use of some of the lots on the side streets where
we find two-family wooden houses, filling the rear portion of the
over-deep lots with only a narrow passageway giving access to the
street.

We find this same unpleasant feature existing in 1884. The same
wooden houses thirty years older but with the value of the property
doubled. We find the rise in land values and the depth and narrow-
ness of the lots forcing the erection of tenements four, five and six
rooms deep with no light except from the street or from the rear yard.

The minimum practicable lot width for tenements under the pres-
ent tenement law has become 373^ feet for five and six story tene-
ments or 25 feet for three and four story tenements. The land values
in this neighborhood, however, seem to demand at least a five story
tenement.

The standard lot width seems to have little or no effect, as they are
varied to suit the wishes of the individual property owners.

PHILADELPHIA, PA.

Within certain limits you are right in assuming that an increase
in frontage has a larger influence upon the value of small houses than

[262]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

the increase in the depth of the lot; for instance, while there might
be no appreciable difference in the selling value of such a lot having
a depth of from 45 to 60 feet, there would be a very appreciable
difference in the value between a similar lot having a 14 foot frontage
and one having a 15 foot frontage.

Study No. 20 1 is in an old section of West Philadelphia which was
built up on what was then the edge of building improvements and
at a time when there were no street improvements and when the
conditions in the surrounding area were uninviting. The houses were
cheap ones built upon small lots, from which the builder realized good
profits, but the character of the occupancy of these houses and the
lack of care and neglect to make repairs has resulted in serious de-
preciation during the nearly forty years they have been in use.

It is generally assumed that the useful life of houses of this kind
is about fifty years and it generally occurs that after twenty-five
years of use they depreciate rapidly and in a majority of instances
those properties which represent about the minimum size of lot be-
come slum districts. The buildings are of little value and the terri-
tory in which they exist has become to some extent a blighted
district.

You no doubt appreciate the fact that the one family row house is
being built in great numbers in this city every year and the general
tendency of people who can afford to do so is to move from a dwell-
ing which is beginning to deteriorate into newer dwellings where all
of the appurtenances and appointments are first class and up to date.
This invariably results in a depreciation of values and of rentals
and occupancy by a less desirable and less prosperous class of tenants.

Resume

Berkeley . . . Land values are independent of lot or building

class and depend on usableness of property
Brookline . . . Poor occupancy restrains rise in values
Louisville . . . Building cheap class of houses detrimental to

moral health of community. Shallower lots

will stabilize values
New York . . . Land values are independent of lot or building

class and depend on usableness of property
Philadelphia . . Increased frontage has larger effect than depth.

Poor occupancy depresses values
Washington . . Effect of opening up center of a large block for

playground purposes has been to eliminate bad

class of population

1 Sketch accompanying Philadelphia report.

[263]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Conclusions

Where growth is active, either in number of residences or conversion
to other uses, the existing lot and building size is of little moment.
Where conversion is slower, the larger plots are worth more be-
cause more easily converted. Established poor occupancy
tends to depress or at least restrain increase of values through
natural depreciation and shift of classes of occupants dependent
upon condition of dwelling.

EFFECT OF RESTRICTIONS ON CONDITIONS

BERKELEY, CAL. Hillegas Block

When the first subdivision was made there were no restrictions
controlling the type or location of the buildings. But it was under-
stood that a fairly good class of residences was required to be built.
Consequently houses costing $1800 to $2000 were built. These were
mostly shingle houses, but lately a higher type of multiple house of
stucco has been erected in lot (12). The houses are built almost
uniformly 25 feet from the street line. This space is used as a lawn.

BRIDGEPORT, CONN.

One thing, however, is clear, even from a superficial study of land
subdivision in its relation to housing, namely, that the worst results
usually have not been due to the low standard or the lack of fitness
of the subdivision into blocks and lots for its original purpose, but
rather to its lack of fitness for the purposes to which there was after-
wards an attempt to adapt it; or else to the lack of regulation, or the
low standard which the public permitted to be applied. Here I be-
lieve public regulation and control would be of great benefit.

In investigating the history of the double lot marked "A," we find
that the original houses were owned by Irish who later sold to Slavs.
The latter were content to hold to the open development, but not
so the Italians, who came into possession in the late nineties. They
immediately built a brick three family dwelling in the rear and about
a year ago made most remarkable changes. The old house on the
west side of the lot was moved to the rear of the original house
on the east, two then being joined together as shown. A large
brick three story tenement for six families was then erected, leaving
as the only open space a little interior courtyard to which an
approach 4 feet wide leads between houses.

LOUISVILLE, KY.

A short distance to the northeast was formerly the center of a
colored settlement. Shortly after 1884 this settlement, which was

[264]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

a growing one, spread out and later overlapped the block, driving
out the whites who abandoned their homes to the colored element.

The first encroachment of the colored people caused the building
of cheap frame houses for that class fronting on the alley. These are
largely individual or two family frame houses. The original houses
fronting the surrounding streets were converted, or rather used, as tene-
ments of one or more rooms each, little alteration being made in them.

The section is now given over entirely to colored tenants and the
neighborhood has reached a low order when measured by property
values.

Owing to the baneful effect the settlement by colored residents has
on the market value of real estate in any section in which they begin
to come, the city of Louisville, at the urgent request of many prop-
erty owners in sections threatened by such settlement, passed a seg-
regation ordinance. This ordinance prohibits the occupation by
colored people of dwellings in any city block in which the whites are
in a majority, at the same time prohibiting the moving of whites into
any block in which colored people are in the majority.

NEW YORK CITY.

One of the greatest difficulties as brought out by this map is the
harm done in the rest of the block by the incursion of factory lofts,
warehouses or stables which cover almost the whole plot, contribut-
ing nothing to the light and air space in the center of the block.

NEWARK, N. J.

While it is desirable to have a depth of 100 feet, it appears that some
restriction, more stringent than that now enforced, should be estab-
lished which would prohibit these undesirable back lot buildings.

Two of the studies presented above show that in sections equally
distant from the center of the city land values have actually stood
still for the past twenty-five years, while the normal increase for the
entire city during that time has been somewhat over 200 per cent.
The third section, however, shows that in a residential district, the
same distance from the center of the city as the other two, land
values have increased to a greater extent than that of the average
increase for the city. The apparent reason for the increase in the
residential section is that more or less stringent restrictions have ap-
parently been enforced by the private owners. It would seem that
the reason for the non-increase in value in the first two sections is
apparently due to promiscuous development which has lead to the
intermingling of tenements, factories, stores, stables, etc. This chaos
is typical of the foreign quarters not alone of Newark but in other
cities, and can be explained apparently by the fact that there has
been a lack of restriction by competent authority. While building

[265]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

codes, tenement house laws, etc., prohibit much undesirable housing,
it is only through the restrictions established by private owners
that good developments are carried out. Herein seems to lie not only
the advisability but even the necessity for restrictions to be enforced
by the municipality or other competent authority.

PHILADELPHIA, PA.

Methods of development will change very materially if "zoning"
should become a general practice, and this possibility should be
seriously considered in connection with any change in the practices
of land subdivision.

A section of this city once occupied by its first families is now
largely occupied by the foreign element and once handsome residences
have become almost, if not quite, slums; on the other hand, some
of our smallest dwellings are perfectly sanitary and wholesome places
in which to live. Land subdivision in itself, without proper control
of the occupancy and use of the land and without the enforcement of
proper health and sanitary regulations, would scarcely have any large
influence in raising the physical, intellectual or moral standards of a
community.

Resume

Berkeley . . . Voluntary restriction works well toward increas-
ing values

Bridgeport . . Lack of restrictions permitted bad housing con-
ditions to grow

Louisville . . . Colored problem has dictated restrictions

New York . . . Lack of restriction as to per cent of lot area cov-
ered has been detrimental

Newark .... Restricted districts have increased in value, others
have not

Philadelphia . . Zoning will materially affect problem

Conclusions

Legal restrictions as to per cent of lot which may be covered, shape
of courts and locations of buildings on lots, must be added to
conditioning lot sizes if best results are to be attained.

ALLEYS
CHICAGO, ILL.

For the better class of residences, lots of this depth are not too
deep. As the Chicago blocks are divided longitudinally by alleys,
it gives an opportunity for the garages or stables to be reached
through the alleys without the need of entrance drives between the
houses.

[266]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

DETROIT, MICH.

The blocks in subdivisions range from 400 to 600 feet in length,
with the streets or avenues 50 to 66 feet in width, from lot line to lot
line. Each block has a 20 foot "H" shaped alley, which permits the
facing of the lots on the four streets in the block, and allowing for an
alley in the rear of each lot.

KANSAS CITY, MO.

The excessive width of the block (nearly 450 feet) has resulted in
the past few years in Van Trump Court, a private way with five cheap
apartment houses, and Cherry Lane, a platted "dead end" street
serving three duplex houses of a rather good class.

It might be added that there has been as yet comparatively little
development in the way of courts or private ways in Kansas City,
and that this block is wider than the average.

Alleys, which are not now used in the better residence additions
here, were then considered a necessity.

LOUISVILLE, KY.

This portion of the city is practically level and is laid out on the
gridiron plan. The block is 420 by 420 feet on property lines with
streets 60 feet wide on all sides.

The lots fronting on Chestnut and Magazine streets were originally
200 feet deep, abutting on what is locally termed a blind alley, i. e.,
opened at one end. This alley is 20 feet wide.

The first encroachment of the colored people caused the
building of cheap frame houses for that class fronting on the
alley.

The law also prohibits the building of a tenement house in an alley
unless there is left at least 25 feet from the front line of the tenement
to the property line on the opposite side of alley. A single house or
two family tenement may be built on an alley of any width provided
six feet is left between the front of building and the property line.
As some of our alleys are only 10 feet wide it can happen that a two
family tenement might be built within 16 feet of a building on the
opposite side of alley.

We might add that it is almost the invariable custom in Louisville
to provide alleys in all of its city blocks varying in width from
10 to 20 feet. Very few blocks in the older parts of the city are
without alleys and it is very difficult to wean the people away from
them. Of late years, however, the sentiment in this respect is chang-
ing, some of the later subdivisions being without alleys. The im-
provement has been noted and many of our city builders are pre-
dicting the general adoption of the newer custom.

[267]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

VEILLER, LAWRENCE

The alley is both a blessing and a curse. As a means of letting
light and air into the interior of city blocks that would otherwise be
without it, it is a distinct gain. And the few cities that have no alleys
feel their misfortune in this regard most keenly. The small, pocketed
back yards, shut away from the free current of air, are unknown in
the city with alleys. The alley is generally, however, an evil. As a
minor street, hidden away at the rear of everything, it becomes the
dumping-ground for all the cast-off material of humanity. Here will
be found collected, in all stages of picturesque disorder and sordid
squalor, all of the unpleasant things of our material existence.

Of the forty-five cities which made returns to the questionnaire,
above referred to, twenty-five, or over half, reported that a system
of alleys was general in their community. It is interesting to find
that in several of them, as in Cleveland and Kansas City, Mo., for
instance, they report that in the old part of the city the alley system
is general, but that alleys do not exist in the new.

Resume

Chicago .... Alleys deliberately designed

Detroit .... Alleys deliberately designed

Kansas City . . In very large blocks, alleys have been used

Louisville . . . Large blocks had alleys (sometimes blind). They

had poor quality structures erected on them.

Modern tendencies are away from use of alleys
Veiller .... 25 cities deliberately designed alleys

Conclusions

Efforts to make use of waste land in deep lots was one cause of alleys
In some cities they were deliberately designed

Their presence, whether deliberate or evolutionary, is bad as now
used

STANDARD DIMENSIONS

BERKELEY, CAL. Hillegas Block

Diagram 3 x represents suggestions and recommendations for an

ideal and practical subdivision of the block in question.
For the purpose of one house a lot 40 by 100 feet is used.
The area thus left vacant because of the excessive depth of the

block is converted into a block playground.

1 Accompanying Berkeley report.

[268]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

CHICAGO, ILL.

The depth of the present day typical lot is 125 feet. This has been
the standard depth for more than forty years.

For the better class of residences, lots of this depth are not too
deep. As the Chicago blocks are divided longitudinally by alleys,
it gives an opportunity for the garages or stables to be reached
through the alleys without the need of entrance drives between the
houses.

For business blocks this depth is good, for it permits the construc-
tion of buildings around ample courtyards. This remark applies
also to the better class apartment houses.

For the poorer residential districts the depth of 125 feet is not
economical. There are many cases where houses have been built
two or three deep in these lots and quite commonly a store occupied
the front of the lot and a dwelling the rear. The depth of lot, there-
fore, depends upon the occupancy.

As dwellings give way to business the greater depth is justified.

NEW YORK CITY

The theory of this arrangement of blocks and lots is based on the
idea that the minimum dimension of streets must be 50 or 60 feet,
in order to take care of the future traffic. For traffic reasons there
is also a limit to the practicable length of blocks. The result was
that it was soon found that if the land for sale was going to be in any
just proportion to the land in the streets, a depth of less than 100
feet would be impracticable.

Our problem in New York is as follows: could the lot be any
shallower, or could the lot be wider, or could the streets be narrower
under New York conditions? Even as it is now the streets occupy
from 35 to 40 per cent of the space occupied by buildings, or between
25 and 30 per cent of the total area. The New York lot is based on
local usages and customs and is designed with a particular view to
convertibility, for taking care of growth and change of use. A less
depth than 100 feet would be impracticable for the larger offices,
stores, factories, warehouses, hotels, apartment houses, etc. How-
ever, when we come to examine the few lots which are deeper than
100 feet we find that they bring about the erection of tenements with
unpleasantly narrow and deep courts, and that they have no other
advantage except for certain types of manufacture. When we come
to lots less than 100 feet deep we find that the common tendency is
to build them leaving no light and air space in the center of the block.

NEWARK, N. J.

In attempting to establish any fixed dimensions for land subdivi-
sion— particularly for dwelling purposes — it must be borne in

[269]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

mind that a very definite relation exists between width and depth,
which relation can only be established after the best dimensions of
the structure are determined — these in turn being governed by the
size and arrangement of rooms, halls, stairs and walls. It would
therefore seem logical to first determine what are the best standard
room dimensions and arrangement to adopt under various conditions
before attempting to fix standard size for land subdivisions.

PHILADELPHIA, PA.

It has appeared to us that one of the chief objects of this investiga-
tion should be to recommend, and if possible obtain, such control as
will provide for methods of subdivision which will not only be more
economical in the subdivision of land for the original purposes for
which it is to be used, but will encourage better housing, better neigh-
borhood surroundings, larger opportunities for practical and progres-
sive city planning and greater permanence and stability of urban
improvements.

VEILLER, LAWRENCE

Realizing, however, the tendencies that will be at work in future
years even in the best residence sections of cities, it is the part of
wisdom to establish as the standard a lot of the shallowest depth
practicable. What that depth should be will, of course, vary in each
community. In general, the owner will desire to have a spacious
front yard, a building sufficiently deep to meet his demands, a
spacious back yard and generally room for a garage or stable at the
extreme rear of the lot. This means a lot generally speaking of 125
feet in depth.

What is the desirable lot unit for a tenement section? My answer
is a lot unit which will result in houses not more than two rooms deep.

For our large cities and for our industrial towns I believe the lots
should not exceed in depth 25 or 30 feet. This means that there
would be no front yard and no back yard; that the houses, built in
continuous rows, would have one frontage on one street and another
frontage on another street.

But for the ordinary laborer, especially the large foreign popula-
tion which is coming to predominate in our American cities, the de-
tached house is not desirable. In the first place we should frankly
recognize that the common unskilled laborer of the type just de-
scribed cannot afford to pay for the vacant land at the front and
rear of his dwelling. It is too great a drain upon his scant income.

It will be seen from a consideration of questions involved that the
desirable depth of lot depends largely on the uses to which the neigh-
borhood is to be put. For high class residence purposes lots should
be 125 feet deep; for the homes of the better paid artisans and nie-

[270]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

chanics lots should be 50 feet deep; for the homes of the unskilled
laborer and what we call the "poor" the lots should be 25 feet in
depth.

Risnmt

Bebkeley ... 110 feet depth used in ideal rearrangement
Chicago . . . .125 feet depth except poorer residential sections
New York ... 100 feet depth best for convertibility
Newark .... House with proper size and arrangement of rooms

should be the basis
Philadelphia . . Desires a standard
Veiller .... Shallowest possible (high class residence 125;

middle class residence 50; poor class residence

25)

Conclusions

A standard is exceedingly desirable.

100 to 125 feet is apparent aim of best standardized conditions and

of present tendencies. It is divisible according to Veiller.
Restrictions should be imposed in any event.

STREETS
KANSAS CITY, MO.

The original lots were made to face east and west, but on account
of the importance of 3d and 4th streets (leading to the business center)
most of the buildings on the corner lots face upon these streets; in
fact it will be seen that a re-division of ^ block was made previous
to 1881, recognizing the importance of the east and west streets.
This re-division was probably made previous to 1870 or perhaps
1860.

Troost Avenue is a section line, and since about 1890 has had
street car service, the terminus for awhile being 33d, which caused
somewhat of a business center to spring up there. About 1890 or
previous some very fine residences were built on Troost Avenue in
the block north, establishing this as a high class district.

Between 1900 and 1905 Linwood Avenue was transformed into
Linwood Boulevard, now one of the most traveled boulevards of
the city. This increased the value of the property, making it too
valuable for residences. High class family hotels, clubs, churches
and apartments have since been built on the boulevard. Two hotels
are shown in this block. Troost Avenue has been transformed into
a local business center with garages, stores, moving picture theaters,
etc.

[271]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Ninth and Tenth streets are more important than Harrison and
Campbell, because they lead directly to the retail district. The
natural tendency for the houses at the ends of the block to front the
important street is shown. The buildings at the southwest corner of
the block are cheap one story houses; those at the northeast corner,
flats; and the remainder, with the exception of the large church, are
residences. Those facing on 10th Street and many of those on Camp-
bell are occupied by negroes.

NEW YORK CITY

We find the rise in land values and the depth and narrowness of
the lots forcing the erection of tenements four, five and six rooms
deep with no light except from the street or from the rear yard.

Large stable and factory units have also appeared in the block,
each covering from two to four lots.

Bleecker Street has become almost exclusively a business street.
West Third Street has also, due to the elevated railroad which was
built there in 1878.

The tallest buildings are only six and seven stories high as the
land values do not warrant the erection of higher buildings.

The land values in this neighborhood, however, seem to demand
at least a five story tenement.

PHILADELPHIA, PA.

Some time subsequent to the erection of the buildings upon Poplar
and Wyalusing streets, the local station which had been maintained
by the Pennsylvania Railroad at Fortieth Street, about 300 feet
south of Penngrove Street, was abandoned, and this resulted in many
of the residents removing to sections of the city where the trans-
portation facilities were better, although there are a number of sur-
face lines to different parts of the city passing along Girard Avenue
which is one square north of Poplar Street. The people who sub-
sequently moved into the neighborhood were not so well off and
when the properties fronting on Penngrave Street were erected the
same class of people occupied them. The general character of the
neighborhood fell off somewhat, which accounts for the depreciation
in values and of rents in this particular neighborhood.

As a rule the operative builders find much larger demand for the
small houses on intermediate streets than they do for the larger and
more expensive ones on main streets and they have been much more
successful in educating people to be contented with the minimum size
yard than the city planning authorities have been in educating them
to a desire for larger yard areas.

It has become an almost invariable custom in Philadelphia, under
our system of establishing the street system far in advance of im-

[272]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

provements, for the first improvement to be of a character that lasts
for a great many years; these improvements are in the form of the
single family row house, the detached, or semi-detached dwelling
and the single residence of a higher type which is erected in some
suburban sections, the class first mentioned being greatly in the
majority.

Resume

(a) Width

(See alleys and their effect)
Philadelphia . . Width determines early development

(b) Character

Philadelphia . . Greater demand off main streets

(c) Direction

Kansas City . . Direction (toward business district) has effect on
values

(d) Traffic

Kansas City . . Amount and kind of travel influences use and

values
New York . . .

(e) Transportation Facilities

Philadelphia . . Values fell off with poorer transportation facilities

Conclusions

Streets of alley width affect conditions and values

Philadelphia narrow lots are on narrow streets by preference.
(Average 30 St. 14 lot, 40 St. 15.5 lot, 60 St. 16.6 lot, except 1
at 60 and 1 at 100, 80 St. 20 lot, except 1 at 60)

Streets leading to business center or having much traffic have greater
values and more expensive structures

[273]

APPENDIX B

TABULATION OF RESULTS OF QUESTIONNAIRE

On the Constitution and Powers of a City Planning
Authority

The Committee on Administrative Procedure sent out a
questionnaire in relation to the constitution and powers of
a city planning authority to 246 individuals and city plan-
ning commissions; 80 replies were received from the
following :

Thomas Adams, Towning Planning Adviser, Commission of Conser-
vation, Ottawa, Canada.

A. H. Andrews, Executive Secretary, Chamber of Commerce, New
Britain, Conn.

Carol Aronovici, Director, Bureau of Social Research, Philadel-
phia, Pa.

Roger N. Baldwin, Secretary, Civic League, St. Louis, Mo.

Harland Bartholomew, Secretary, City Plan Commission, Newark,
N. J.

Edward M. Bassett, Chairman, Commission on Building Districts
and Restrictions, New York.

E. H. Bennett, Architect, Chicago, HI.

G. Frank Beer, Toronto Housing Co., Toronto, Canada.

Alfred Bettman, Lawyer, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Arthur C. Comey, Commissioner, Homestead Commission, Boston,
Mass.

Otto W. Davis, Secretary, Committee on Housing, Civic and Com-
merce Association, Minneapolis, Minn.

John M. Demarest, General Manager, Sage Foundation Homes Co.,
Forest Hills, L. I.

Richard C. Derby, Real Estate Operator, Newport, R. I.

Chas. E. Esterbrook, Lawyer, Milwaukee, Wis.

Paul L. Feiss, Member, Chamber of Commerce, Cleveland, Ohio.

Mayo Fesler, Secretary, Civic League, Cleveland, Ohio.

Edwin A. Fisher, Consulting Engineer to City of Rochester, Roch-
ester, N. Y.

[274]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Andrew J. Gavett, City Surveyor and Street Commissioner," Plain-
field, N. J.

Charles E. Gibson, Chairman, Newton City Planning Board, New-
ton, Mass.

E. P. Goodrich, Consulting Engineer, Borough of Manhattan, New
York.

J. H. Gundlach, Vice-Chairman, City Plan Commission, St. Louis,
Mo.

B. A. Haldeman, Assistant Engineer, Bureau of Surveys, Philadel-
phia, Pa.

S. Herbert Hare, Landscape Architect, Kansas City, Mo.

Edward R. Hathaway, Mayor, New Bedford, Mass.

Munson Havens, Secretary, Chamber of Commerce, Cleveland, Ohio.

R. W. Hemphill, Jr., Division Manager, Eastern Michigan Edison
Co., Ann Arbor, Mich.

E. M. Herlihy, Secretary, City Planning Board, Boston, Mass.
Edwin S. Herman, President, City Planning Commission, Harris-
burg, Pa.

Robert Hoffman, Commissioner and Chief Engineer, Department of
Public Service, Cleveland, Ohio.

George E. Hooker, Civic Secretary, City Club, Chicago, HI.

Richard M. Hurd, President, Lawyers Mortgage Co., New York City.

Stanley H. Hutchinson, Executive Secretary, Board of Trade, Frank-
lin, Pa.

John Ihlder, Field Secretary, National Housing Association, New
York City.

F. Ellis Jackson, Architect, Providence, R. I.
Fred W. Keller, Mayor, South Bend, Ind.
Robert D. Kohn, Architect, New York City.

A. J. Lawton, Commissioner, Public Works and Property, Colorado
Springs, Col.

Meyer Lissner, Lawyer, Los Angeles, Cal.

W. S. Mackendrick, Toronto, Canada.

Milo R. Maltbie, Member, Advisory Commission on City Plan, New
York City.

H. J. March, Civil Engineer, Utility Engineering Co., New Bruns-
wick, N. J.

Benjamin C. Marsh, Secretary, Congestion Committee, New York
City.

Henry H. Meyers, Secretary, Advisory City Plan Commission, Al-
ameda, Cal.

Cyrus C. Miller, Chairman, Executive Committee, Advisory Council
of Real Estate Interests, New York City.

Leslie W. Miller, Secretary, Fairmount Park Association, Phila-
delphia, Pa.

[275]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

E. T. Mische, Park Board, Portland, Ore.

Clifford B. Moore, Consulting Engineer, Borough of Queens, New
York.

J. C. Murphy, Architect, Louisville, Ky.

J. J. Murphy, Commissioner, Tenement House Department, New
York City.

W. M. O'Shaughnessy, City Engineer, Department of Public Works,
San Francisco, Cal.

Charles H. Parsons, Chairman, Planning Commission, Springfield,
Mass.

T. Glenn Phillips, Secretary, City Plan and Improvement Commis-
sion, Detroit, Mich.

Allen B. Pond, Architect, Chicago, 111.

A. J. Porter, President, Shredded Wheat Co., Niagara Falls, N. Y.

Frederic B. Pratt, President, Brooklyn Committee on City Plan,
Brooklyn, N. Y.

Charles F. Puff, Jr., Surveyor and Regulator, Department of Public
Works, Philadelphia, Pa.

Edward K. Putnam, Real Estate, Davenport, Iowa.

J. R. Reynolds, Secretary, City Plan Commission, Erie, Pa.

Chas. Mulford Robinson, Specialist in Town Planning, Rochester,
N. Y.

Morris R. Sherrerd, Chief Engineer, Department of Public Works,
Newark, N. J.

William C. Stanton, Secretary, Department of Public Works, Phila-
delphia, Pa.

John K. Stauffer, Secretary, City Planning Commission, Reading, Pa.

Frank Stevens, Jersey City, N. J.

Vincent S. Stevens, Secretary, Chamber of Commerce, Akron, Ohio.

C. A. Sundstrom, Bureau of Surveys, Department of Public Works,

Philadelphia, Pa.
H. E. Sweet, Mayor, Attleboro, Mass.

Howard E. Taylor, Secretary, Board of Trade, Pittsfield, Mass.
Alfred H. Terry, City Engineer, Bridgeport, Conn.
Town Planning Board, Watertown, Mass.
Louis L. Tribus, Consulting Engineer, New York City.

D. L. Turner, Deputy Engineer, Subway Construction, Public Serv-

ice Commission, New York.

George W. Tuttle, Principal Assistant Engineer, Topographical Bu-
reau, Borough of Richmond, New York.

Richard B. Watrous, Secretary, American Civic Association, Wash-
ington, D. C.

A. L. White, President, Park Board, Spokane, Wash.

G. Gordon Whitnall, Secretary, City Planning Commission, Los
Angeles, Cal.

[276]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

W. S. Willigerod, City Engineer, East Orange, N. J.

L. D. Woodworth, Secretary, Garfield Real Estate Co., Rochester,

N. Y.
Henry C. Wright, Commissioner, Department of Public Charities,

New York City.
Phelps Wyman, Landscape Architect, Minneapolis, Minn.

Question 1. — Should some single city planning office or authority
be created in each city with at least the following powers and duties?

(a) The adoption and revision of a tentative plan for the physical
development of the city.

(6) The correlation of particular improvements, by whatever au-
thority originated, with the requirements of the comprehensive plan.

There were 80 replies, of which 79 were in favor of a single planning
office or authority with the powers specified, and one, while in favor
of a city planning office or authority, suggested that in a large city
there might be several city planning authorities, one in each borough
or appropriate local subdivision.

Extracts from Certain Replies to Question 1

Thomas Adams, Ottawa, Canada:

Yes; but a tentative plan would be of no practical value beyond
being an illustration for the guidance of a city or town authority.
As the latter should, however, be an executive body, it should pre-
pare no tentative plan, except under legislative powers which would
protect its interests while proceeding from the tentative to the defi-
nite stage of planning.

William C. Stanton, Philadelphia, Pa.:

(a) It is advisable that a city planning office or authority should be
created in every city, particularly in those having a form of govern-
ment resulting from time to time in complete changes of administra-
tion with the officials holding their office for a relatively short time.
Such city planning authority should be composed of members whose
terms would overlap, affording opportunity for a continuous scheme
of development. The adoption and revision of an elastic tentative
plan for the physical development of the city is quite necessary and
should be prepared to meet the necessities of the municipality for a
period of from 15 to 50 years in advance, depending upon the size
and growth of the locality.

(6) All improvements contemplated, either in the immediate
future or at a later period, should be incorporated in such a compre-
hensive plan, which should be of such elasticity as readily to be modi-

[277]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

fied to meet the average unforeseen emergency. In the preparation
of such a plan careful attention should be paid to the larger princi-
ples, leaving the details to be perfected at a time when the perma-
nent improvements are undertaken. By following such procedure —
although the first cost in some instances may be greater — there will
result eventually a considerable economy through the avoiding of
needless repetition and overlapping of improvements and develop-
ments.

Louis L. Tribus, New York City:

There can be no adequate comprehensive plan for" New York
City, for long before any really intelligent plan has been worked out,
the generation desiring to act under one will have died and new
ideas will prevail; consequently advisory powers only need be
vested in a commission.

Question 2. — Should the creation of a city planning authority be
made mandatory or permissive?

Seventy-six replies were received; 45 favored making the creation
of a city planning authority mandatory; 2 favored the mandatory
method in case the city planning authority had merely advisory
powers; 25 favored the permissive method and 4 the permissive
method at first, but eventually the mandatory method.

Extracts from Certain Replies to Question 2
Alfred Bettman, Cincinnati, Ohio:

In so far as any particular municipality is concerned, the creation
of a city planning authority should be permissive. This is upon
general home rule principles and not peculiar to city planning. The
charter of a city, adopted by the people of that city, should make the
creation of such an authority mandatory.

Arthur C. Comey, Boston, Mass.:

I favor the permissive city planning authority if that authority is
to be given extensive powers, which are mentioned in the circular and
which I also favor. If the city planning authority, so called, is to be
merely an advisory board, as it is at present in Massachusetts, I
favor following the Massachusetts precedent of making such boards
mandatory. While their value in the early stages of city planning is
great, I am convinced that ultimately they will prove an inefficient
means of promoting city planning.

John J. Murphy, New York City:

The creation of a city planning authority ought to be mandatory.
I do not think this is a violation of the policy of home rule any more

[ 278 ]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

than is the requirement that a city shall have regular officials for the
operation of orderly government. The principle of home rule is not
invaded by the creation of necessary or desirable authorities which,
in the judgment of the state, are necessary for the welfare of those
citizens residing in municipalities. It is when the legislature either
attempts to prescribe who shall be the members of such bodies or
what they shall do that the home rule principle is vitiated. I do not
think therefore, in view of the important work which a city planning
committee can do, that there should be serious objection to making
it a mandatory requirement. This is especially true in view of the
necessity for the work of the committee being consistent and con-
tinuous.

Allen B. Pond, Chicago, 111.:

In my judgment the city planning art and the general knowledge
thereof have not reached a point in America where it is wise or safe
to make it mandatory that every community, even of a certain mini-
mum size, should establish such an authority. America has not
learned to appreciate the value and function of expert service, has
not learned correctly to pass on qualifications for expert service.
So far as town planning is concerned, much of the work that has been
suggested thus far in America is, in my judgment, superficial in char-
acter, dealing largely with esthetic features and with city planning
viewed from a scenic standpoint rather than from its fundamental
relations to the functioning of a city organism. For these reasons I
do not think that the time is ripe for a mandatory law, however de-
sirable such law may seem on a priori grounds. We may hope, even
though we may not justly presume, that any community which seeks
to adopt by referendum a permissive law will have reached a stage in
its comprehension of the subject such that it may be given power
under a permissive act.

G. Gordon Whitnall, Los Angeles, Cal.:

In cities of large proportions or having the physical probabilities
of at some time becoming large, the creation of the authority should
be mandatory, as a general rule. A lack of such authority results in-
evitably in certain community "diseases" that have a definite unde-
sirable influence on the collective individual life of the community.
A municipality should be compelled to consider such conditions just
as much as the lesser evils of contagion where, if the city does not
act, the power higher up steps in.

Question 3. — Should the city planning authority, in order to carry
out its function of correlating the particular improvement with the
requirements of the comprehensive plan, be given

[279]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

(a) An absolute veto?

(b) A veto that may be overridden by vote of council or other
authority?

(c) Merely the opportunity to investigate and report?

(d) A combination of the above, i. e., an absolute veto in certain
cases and merely an opportunity to present a report in other cases?

Seventy-four replies were received; 9 favored merely advisory
powers; 7 favored absolute veto; 28 favored a veto that could be
overridden by vote of council or other authority, and 30 favored some
combination of the above methods.

Extracts from Certain Replies to Question 3
Harland Bartholomew, Newark, N. J.:

A veto that may be overridden by vote of council or other author-
ity. A city planning authority is usually appointive, seldom, if ever,
elective. To invest it with power of absolute veto would be contrary
to the principles of good government. Power to investigate only is
insufficient and tends to belittle the authority and its position. A
veto that may be overridden by vote of council or other authority
is more nearly in accord with sensible government and will generally
work out satisfactorily, provided the city planning authority will
qualify its recommendations with a clear and concise statement of
how and why these conclusions have been reached. This custom
prevails in Newark and has succeeded in instances too numerous to
mention.

E. H. Bennett, Chicago, III.:

A veto that may be overridden by vote of council is in all proba-
bility to be preferred. The experience in Chicago has shown very
clearly that veto power in some form or other is desirable, as it is neces-
sary for a plan commission to have such standing as will enable it
to be recognized and not be put in the position of wasting its strength
fighting for recognition.

Alfred Bettman, Cincinnati, Ohio:

I think the device which was worked out in the proposed charter
for the city of Cincinnati is the best. It provides for a veto that
may be overridden by a vote of council, the vote of at least two- thirds
of the membership being required for overruling the disapproval of
the planning commission. In addition to this vote of council there
is also required, to overrule the commission, the vote of the head of
the particular department under which the proposed improvement
falls. The theory back of this device is obviously that separate de-

[280]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

partments in a city government, which have absolute powers inde-
pendent of each other and independent of the main administration
and council, are apt to tend to delay, inefficiency and even worse
evils, and that, where the administrative and legislative functions
are kept separate, there should be at least one point in the adminis-
trative departments, and one point in the legislative department,
where control and responsibility finally concentrate for the whole
city program and finance. Therefore, if the head of the department
under which the proposed improvement falls and two-thirds of the
council are agreed upon disagreeing with the city planning commission,
the latter's desires should not prevail. Our belief in this arrangement
is not the result of any experience with city planning, for Cincinnati
has as yet had little experience with city planning. It is the result of
observation of the working of the city government generally.

Arthur C. Comey, Boston, Mass.:

I do not believe in absolute veto, inasmuch as the council might
abolish a planning board and pass ordinances before reinstating it,
as has been done in the case of art commissions. I do favor the veto
which may be overridden by vote of the council, as the council will
naturally hesitate to do this except in extreme cases.

Mayo Fesler, Cleveland, Ohio:

I am not sure that the city planning commission should be given
an absolute veto. It should require at least a majority vote of the
council to override its action. It should probably have an absolute
veto on questions of design and location and the power to make
specific recommendations for a broader city plan.

Charles E. Gibson, Newton, Mass.:

The possession of the veto power in any degree would add a new
and confusing element in the organization of municipalities, an
element directly contrary to the present tendency in municipal admin-
istration reform, which is toward small legislative bodies and concen-
trated executive powers. The possession of the veto power would
immediately raise acutely the question whether the planning board
should be appointed or elected. If it possesses the veto power, it
would almost necessarily become one of the strongest forces in mu-
nicipal government. We believe that, so long as a planning board
has merely advisory powers which it exercises with ability and sound
judgment, it is freer in action and its opinion will have greater
weight.

B. A. Haldeman, Philadelphia, Pa.:

The city planning authority should have power of absolute con-
firmation in certain kinds of improvements and should have power to

[281]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

investigate and report upon such improvements as may not be an
essential part of the tentative plan itself, but may have considerable
influence in the effectual carrying out of the purposes of the plan.

Edward R. Hathaway, New Bedford, Mass.:

Theoretically the idea of a city planning board appeals to me, as
it undoubtedly does to every other city executive. So far as matters
of investigation and report are concerned, I am willing to agree that
such a board would be of practical advantage. Government in this
country, as I understand the principle, is government by the people,
and this means all the people. Naturally those who are elected by
the people should be willing to seek and consider advice from a think-
ing group of public spirited citizens, who may be appointed a plan-
ning board or who may act from individual initiative, but I firmly
believe that the time has not come when the powers of the people to
govern themselves, in whatever direction they deem wise, should be
taken from them; and at the present time the officers elected by the
people are fully able to care for the civic problems which are liable
to arise.

S. Herbert Hare, Kansas City, Mo.:

The city planning authority, in order to carry out its function,
should be given a power which would be stronger than merely an in-
vestigation and report. On the other hand the power of absolute
veto would be too strong in cases where the city planning department
comes under the control of political factions or other interests, as
may be expected in some cases. Again, errors of judgment are always
liable to be made in the most conscientious work. In place of the
combination suggested under subhead (d) I would suggest a combina-
tion of (a) and (6), that is, of absolute veto in certain cases and a veto
that may be overridden by a decisive vote of council or other author-
ity in other cases.

Robert Hoffman, Cleveland, Ohio:

It seems somewhat inconsistent to me to establish a city planning
authority with absolute power to inaugurate or prevent undertakings
at variance with those possibly being carried out by elective authori-
ties or not in compliance with the sentiment of the majority. It
would seem that method (d), namely, "an absolute veto in certain
cases and merely an opportunity to present a report in other cases,"
would probably prove equally effective and meet with less opposi-
tion than with the other suggestions made.

John Ihlder, New York City:

(a) Should not be an absolute veto. City planning is too new for
us to be very rigid in our requirements. First, we cannot yet be sure

[282]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

that the boards themselves will always decide wisely. Second, and
quite as important, we cannot be sure that the people will back them
up in their decisions, especially in cases where there is a plausible
reason for some public improvement which will serve an immediate
need, but will be a decided detriment, or a cause of considerable
wasted energy and money, when considered as part of the whole city
plan. So it seems to me it would be wiser to permit of considerable
flexibility for a few years while both the boards and the people are
learning the practical value of city planning and learning how to
apply it.

(6) Yes. A veto that may be overridden by vote of council or
other authority gives the city planning board enough power to make
its members feel that they are doing something practical and yet does
not enable them to stop public improvements arbitrarily and without
the consent of other authorities. During these first years at least, it
seems to me, the city planning board should carry its points by weight
of argument and reason rather than by the exercise of power. A con-
ditional veto, such as this, will force the other authorities to listen to
the city planning board's reasons.

Hon. William A. Magee, Pittsburgh, Pa.: l

I feel that the commission ought to have some measure of con-
trol over all projects which affect the physical growth of the city.
This power should not be absolute. I think the proper measure of
control would be effected by requiring the reconsideration on the
part of the councilmen or aldermen of those ordinances which have
been vetoed by the commission. The real value of the veto lies in
the fact that the attention of the public is attracted to another view
of the question. If the opinions of the planning commission on the
vetoed ordinances have merit, no doubt enough public attention to
the matter will be attracted by the publication of the planning com-
mission's veto message. The final judgment of the councilmen or
aldermen, therefore, will be based not only on having two views of
the matter presented to them, but the views of the planning commis-
sion will be fortified to the extent of their value by expressions of
public opinion through the newspapers and other media of public
expression.

William C. Stanton, Philadelphia, Pa.:

(a) All city planning authority should be chosen from among the
type of men which represents the highest, most intellectual and
broadest minded citizens or officials of the communities in question.

1 See "Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on City Planning,
Mav 5-7, 1913."

[283]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

They should be given certain powers, but it is rather difficult to
decide upon what questions an absolute veto should be in their
hands.

(6) A veto that may be overridden by veto of council or other
authority. Such vote of the representatives of the people is, while
valuable, nevertheless not conducive to the best results, as often the
citizens or other representatives are not sufficiently conversant with
the technical problems to be dealt with as should be the members of a
city planning commission, and such action is a serious reflection upon
the intelligence of men who have presumably given deep considera-
tion to the various problems.

(c) A city planning commission with no authority other than that
of investigation, while of a certain value, is nevertheless laboring under
a severe disadvantage in that they may spend considerable time and
go to some expense in making investigations only to have their rec-
ommendations ignored. As most of these city planning commissions
serve "gratis," it is apt to be most discouraging to the members if
they have no way of enforcing their views.

(d) A combination of the above, having a committee clothed with
absolute powers in certain cases and modified powers in others, might
be a proper solution.

Allen B. Pond, Chicago, III.:

In my judgment the authority should be given an absolute veto,
not one that may be overridden by vote of council or other authority.
The most that should be granted in the way of outside interference
should be a stop order which will enforce, if the city council or other
constituted authority should think necessary, a delay, consultation
with other experts and a public hearing; but the constituted au-
thority should have full power to act after such delay, consultation
and hearing. It would, in my judgment, be fatal to allow passing
(temporary) elected officials or officials appointed for other reasons
to challenge successfully decisions of a proper expert body, and no
city plan authority should be created except with a full view to the
scope of its power and the consequent necessity that its personnel be
men of suitable attainments and high character.

Question k> — Should the comprehensive tentative plan include
the following?
(a) Street system.
(6) Park and playground system.

(c) Transit system.

(d) Grouping of public buildings.

(e) Rail and water terminals.
(/) Markets.

[284]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

(g) Districting of city for purpose of regulating the height, area
and use of buildings.

(h) What other matters should be included?

Seventy-four replies were received, all but one of which agreed that
the items indicated in (a) to (g) inclusive should be included in the
comprehensive plan. The one objection was to districting of the city
for the purpose of regulating the height, area and use of buildings.
Various other matters were suggested by one or two individuals for
inclusion in the comprehensive plan, such as water and sewer sys-
tems, disposal of waste and garbage, water fronts, preservation of
places of natural beauty or historic interest, regulation of advertis-
ing signs, construction and location of wires and poles, location of un-
derground structures, bridges, cemeteries, fire safety and housing.

Question 5. — Should the function of an art jury or commission be
combined with those of a city planning authority?

Seventy-one replies were received; 32 were opposed to the com-
bination of an art jury with the city planning authority; 9 were op-
posed to such combination, except for small cities, and 30 favored the
combination.

Extracts from Certain Replies to Question 5

Thomas Adams, Ottawa, Canada:

If architectural control is sought in a scheme, the best system of
control is through a consultative architect or permanent official archi-
tect of the local authority, with an art commission as a body of appeal
on architectural and similar points instead of a court of law.

Roger N. Baldwin, St. Louis, Mo.:

We believe here that the art commission should be entirely sepa-
rate from the city plan commission as the functions are quite differ-
ent. A group of persons passing upon a public improvement from
the point of view of its appearance has entirely different considera-
tions in mind than from one passing upon it from the point of view
of its utility and place in a general plan.

Charles E. Gibson, Newton, Mass.:

The answer to this question depends very largely upon the size and
character of the city affected. In a small city having few problems
for an art commission, a special commission would seem to be un-
necessary. In a large city, or one where many problems of artistic
character were under consideration, a separate commission should be
appointed. The practical engineering, health and business problems

[285]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

appropriate to a planning board call for different qualities than those
required by an art commission. Close cooperation should be secured
between two such bodies.

Robert Hoffman, Cleveland, Ohio:

I see no reason why the city planning authority should not assume
the functions of an art jury or commission. This would not neces-
sarily mean that the members themselves should pass upon matters
of art, but that they could have power to provide for the establish-
ment of an advisory commission, as the same might be required.

John Ihlder, New York City:

The function of an art jury or commission should not be combined
with those of a city planning authority. The functions of the two are
quite distinct. The city planning board has to do primarily with the
practical utility of proposed improvements, the art jury primarily
with the artistic execution of those improvements. For instance, the
first decides that a bridge of a certain capacity is needed at a certain
point. The second passes only upon the artistic quality of the design
— example of art commission's function, the designs of the bridges at
Spuyten Duyvil and Hell Gate.

F. Ellis Jackson, Providence, R. I.:

No. For several reasons it would seem that such an arrangement
would be inadvisable, inasmuch as many persons who would be best
qualified to act on an art jury or commission would not be satisfactory
members of the city planning authority, dealing in large and impor-
tant matters closely allied to commercial and physical conditions.
It is possible that a commission might be a subcommission of the city
planning authority, but it would seem advisable that the art commis-
sion and city planning authority should work in harmony with a pos-
sible mutual member serving on each of these commissions.

Robert D. Kohn, New York City:

On your question No. 5 I have very decided opinions. It seems to
me fatal to permit the combination of an art jury or commission with
a city planning authority. I take the liberty to attach hereto a copy
of a report recently sent to Cleveland on the proposed city planning
commission organization for that city.

The particular function of an art commission is not necessarily con-
sistent with the work of a city planning commission and may in some
ways be inconsistent with such work. The two functions should not
be performed by the same class of persons. The class of persons that
should serve on an art commission is entirely different from the par-
ticular class that may properly be selected to serve on a city planning

[286]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

commission. While it is very desirable, as I understand the situation
in Cleveland at the present time, that the city planning commission
shall be composed in the main, if not entirely, of responsible city
officials, working with the advice and guidance of well informed
citizens and experts, it is highly undesirable, in my opinion, that any
city official, with the exception of possibly the mayor, should be on
an art commission. The majority of matters that come before an art
commission for approval or disapproval are matters that are presented
by heads of city departments in connection with their official work.
Such submissions should be passed on by a commission of experts,
architects, painters and sculptors, with the addition of a number of
public spirited citizens, chosen from the art-loving and art-knowing
public. In most cities the choice is made by the mayor from among
the officers of the art museums, the universities and the patrons of
the fine arts. Under the New York Charter the choice of both artists
and laymen is made by the mayor from a list presented for his consid-
eration by the federated arts societies of the city (Fine Arts Federa-
tion).

My main point here is that your commission has of necessity fre-
quently to oppose or require the modification of a design submitted
by city officials, and therefore the city officials should not be on the
art commission. It will lose most, if not all, of its effect if that be the
case.

The class of citizens that will be effective on the city planning com-
mission may not be, and probably would not be, effective on an art
commission. I hope I have been able to make clear why the two
functions should be kept separate. I think every person that has had
experience in any other city will say the same thing. An art com-
mission should be kept in the main entirely outside of the functions
of the city planning commission. It should be a commission of experts
and laymen interested in the arts. The city planning commission
may very properly be composed of city officials, advised by and work-
ing with persons outside of the city government.

Edward K. Putnam, Davenport, Iowa:

The art commission should at least be allied with the plan com-
mission. There might be a danger in actually combining the two.
The business men might predominate on the plan commission, when
they might not themselves be competent judges of works of art. On
the other hand, if the art people predominated on the commission,
undue emphasis might be laid on certain architectural and art fea-
tures of the city, such as grouping all public buildings, and this might
tend to make too much of the city beautiful and not enough of the
city efficient.

[287]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

William C. Stanton, Philadelphia, Pa.:

The function of an art jury should be combined with that of the
city planning authority. The present function of most art juries is
simply that of censorship, while the function of most city planning
commissions is creative. Were the two functions combined in one
body there would result a smoother and more rapid development with
much less friction.

Howard E. Taylor, Pittsfield, Mass.:

I hardly think it practicable to combine the functions of an art
jury or commission with the city planning authority, my opinion
being based upon the belief that, if anything is to be accomplished
by a city planning authority, it must satisfy the utilitarian in the
mind of the American public, and too much art mixed in with its
work would defeat any hope of its gaining any public support.

Question 6. — How should the city planning authority be con-
stituted?

(a) The city engineer or other similar official?

(6) A committee of the board of estimate, council, governing com-
mission or similar body?

(c) A special ex officio commission consisting of department heads
or engineers having to do with the planning of particular functions?

(d) A special commission composed of citizens who are not city
officials and who serve without pay?

Seventy-one replies were received; 2 favored the city engineer or
other similar official; 3 favored a committee of the board of estimate,
council, governing commission or similar body; 2 favored a special
ex officio commission consisting of department heads or engineers
having to do with the planning of particular functions; 28 favored a
special commission composed of citizens who are not city officials and
who served without pay, and 36 favored some combination of the
four methods above enumerated.

Extracts from Certain Replies to Question 6
Harland Bartholomew, Newark, N. J.:

A city planning authority should be small, consisting of five mem-
bers in cities over 100,000 population and of three members in cities
under 100,000 population. If desirable to enlarge this authority, add
to it such other citizens and officials as may be desired as advisory
members only. A five-member authority should consist of the city
engineer and one other representative city official, for instance, a
member of the board of estimate, council, governing commission or
similar body, the other three members to be citizens, preferably a

[288]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

lawyer, an architect and a representative business man. An authority
of three members should consist of the city engineer and two citizens,
preferably a lawyer and a business man.

E. M. Bassett, New York City:

The city legislature (council) should be the final authority on all
questions of city planning. The city engineering office should be the
student and workman on the city plan. Commissions created should
be advisory.

John J. Murphy, New York City:

Personally, I prefer the suggestion made in subdivision (d) of this
number. I think that the body ought not to be composed of public
officials. Such a committee can command at any time the services of
such officials, and I think its decisions ought to be entirely free from
control by city administration.

Alfred Bettman, Cincinnati, Ohio:

Here again I would recommend the plan which we worked out for
the said proposed Cincinnati Charter. In that case the number seven
was adopted, of which four were to be citizens other than city officials.
This was to put the city officials in a minority on the planning com-
mission, and the citizen members were given terms that would not be
coterminus with those of the official members. The official members
were to be the mayor and the director of highways and the president
of the park board. Of all executive officials, the mayor might natu-
rally be expected to be most interested in city planning and the proper
correlation of the different classes of public improvements. The
other two members were chosen on the principle of placing on the
commission the heads of those two departments which have charge of
the public works of the classes which, quantitatively at least, are most
related to city planning. The general principle of some citizen mem-
bers and some official members is a good one, and among the latter
the mayor ought certainly be chosen. Just which of the other depart-
ment heads should belong to the planning commission would depend
on the particular form of departmental organization in each city.

City Planning Board of Boston, Boston, Mass.:

Different plans might be best in different places. The Boston plan
is that listed as (d), except that the members of the board, five in
number, are appointed by the mayor (under a mandatory state law)
and that the board is a city department. This plan has its weakness,
for the board has practically no power and very little money, but
would not (a) be likely to be too narrow a plan, and would not (b) and
(c) tend to be casual and not sufficiently concentrated upon the plan-
ning function?

[289]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Mayo Fesler, Cleveland, Ohio:

The city planning commission should be constituted in part of city
officials and in part of citizens holding no official relation to the gov-
ernment. The difficulty of having department heads compose a
commission is that they are already swamped with the details of the
work and cannot give sufficient attention to a comprehensive plan
for the city.

B. A. Haldeman, Philadelphia, Pa.:

The city planning authority should be an executive department
of the city government in larger cities and should be a department of
the state government for the preparation of plans for the development
of rural sections and the smaller communities. A department of this
kind should be charged with the duty of preparing tentative plans and
officially establishing certain of them and should have an organiza-
tion permitting it to make all the investigations and perform all the
work necessary to the preparation of such plans. Official approval of
the plans should be in the hands of a board of confirmation constituted
in such a manner that its personnel may not be subject to radical
changes, as it is essential to the proper carrying out of such plans that
the officials having authority should be able to establish and maintain
consistent and continuing policies which shall not be subject to vio-
lent changes. It might be possible in some cities for this board to be
composed of the heads of the various executive departments.

S. Herbert Hare, Kansas City, Mo.

The city planning authority should be constituted to a great extent
of citizens of broad ideas and sound judgment, serving with or with-
out pay, together with representatives of the city government in the
form of the city engineer, committee of the council or even a regular
commission in the case of commission government. Experts in the
various fields should be in regular or occasional consultation.

Robert Hoffman, Cleveland, Ohio:

The city planning authority should, I believe, contain certain
public officials, whose retention in office is continuous and who are
not subject to frequent removals on account of political changes, and
whose work is intimately connected with that of such a city planning
authority. This might include positions such as city engineer, engi-
neer of parks and city architects. It would also seem that certain
elective or appointive officials, as, for instance, the mayor, director of
public service, director of finance and president of the council, could
be considered in connection with such authority. In addition there
should be a number of citizens who are not city officials and who are
especially adapted for work of the kind required and who should
constitute a majority of the commission.

[290]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

John Ihlder, New York City:

I believe that the city planning board should be a special commis-
sion of citizens, not city officials, to serve without pay, but with power
to call upon city officials for information and advice. In an ex officio
commission the members are likely to be so engrossed with the details
of their own individual work that they can spend little time or thought
in considering the city as a whole. In addition there is likely to be a
little rivalry between departments, so that suggestions originating in
one will not be received with acclamation by others. The city plan-
ning board should have a paid secretary who will give all his time to
the work.

Hon. William A. Magee, Pittsburgh, Pa.:1

No particular executive officer should be on this commission unless
all can be. In a city that has a commission form of government, say,
not more than three or five commissioners, I should say that all ought
to be on the planning commission. In a very small city, if there is one
particular officer that has practically all public work under his control,
I should say that he ought to be on the planning commission. But in
larger cities of several hundred thousand, where there is a wide dis-
tribution of executive authority, it would be a hazardous experiment
to take on anyone, in view of the jealousy which might be aroused.
It certainly could not take all heads of departments, for your com-
mission would be made unwieldy. My way of meeting the difficulty
is to have the commission obtain its authority directly from the chief
executive of the city, who, at least in theory, has all the administra-
tive functions directly or indirectly under his control. If the planning
commissioners receive their appointments from the mayor, they are
most likely to have the effective cooperation of all the heads of de-
partments, since they are all subordinate to the chief executive.

Benjamin C. Marsh, New York City:

The city planning authority should be appointed by the mayor
and should include the city engineer, or other similar official, and the
department head or engineer having to do with the planning of par-
ticular functions. A special volunteer advisory committee of citizens
who are not city officials would be advisable, but the ultimate power
to decide the city planning should be vested in the city officials.

Allen B. Pond, Chicago, III.:

The objection to having the backbone or controlling force in the
city planning authority vested as in forms (a), (b) and (c) is the passing

1 See "Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on City Planning,
May 5-7, 1913."

[291]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

character of such officials, and therefore of commissions thus con-
stituted, and the reasonable presumption that under conditions pre-
vailing in American city politics such officials and commissions would
be largely unfit for the function. If a commission is established under
form (d) with specified duration of term of service of individuals com-
posing it and the overlapping of the terms of individual members,
this will give a much stronger guarantee of wise policy in the first
place and of more permanency to the policy thereafter. The authority
vested in such a commission and the fact that it is reasonably per-
manent in its constituency will tend to dictate careful and wise selec-
tion of its members in the first instance. City officials, particularly if
elective, should be added to this commission or made parts of it only
as a minority, nor should such elective officials plus appointed offi-
cials, such as city engineers and the like, when combined constitute a
majority. I take it that it would be possible to draw the act in ques-
tion or the charter provision so that the commission would have power
to call upon city engineers and similar functionaries, corporation
counsels and the like for information and facts without such officials
being voting members of the commission.

The commission should have in it men who are particularly expert
in certain aspects of the work required to be done, architects, engi-
neers, transportation experts, park and playground experts and the
like; but it is absolutely essential that there be in its membership,
and especially at the head of the commission, the sort of person whose
breadth of view will enable him to see far beyond the scope of the
ordinary expert in some one field, to the end that the suggestions of
the experts may be whipped into shape and made to serve a total and
greater unity than otherwise could be achieved. My experience has
led me to a high regard for the specific value of expert service and a
rather low esteem of the ability of experts to see the larger aspects of
their own field where such field has to be related to an inclusive scheme.
It is my impression, perhaps somewhat biased, that this more in-
clusive view is more likely to be found with architects than with any
other one class of the population at the present time, although it may
be found in some all-round connoisseur as well.

Frederic B. Pratt, Brooklyn, N. Y.:

The city planning authority should consist of representatives of
the city engineer's department and representatives of the board of
estimate. I do not believe it wise for citizens who are not in the em-
ploy of the city to be members of this commission.

Edward K. Putnam, Davenport, Iowa:

As to the makeup of a city planning authority, to have this work
done by the city engineer or by a committee of the city council keeps

[292]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

it too close to city politics. It seems to me the best results could
come from a combination commission made up of certain officials
ex officio and of citizens. The president of this commission should
be a citizen and not an official, and the citizen should predominate
on the commission, but the officials should be sufficiently well repre-
sented to be made to feel that they are vitally interested in the work.

William C. Stanton, Philadelphia, Pa.:

(a) City planning authority may be constituted in various ways,
depending upon the size of the municipality. If it is possible to ob-
tain a man possessed of the necessary qualifications, it is often much
simpler to engage him and clothe him with full powers subject to
proper precautions. Larger communities generally require a com-
mission. The city engineer should by all means be a member of such
board, as he is generally presumed to have some knowledge on the
subject in question. In small cities he might be vested with full
powers.

(6) A committee of the board of estimate, council or government
commission might constitute a very able body but for the fact that
most of these boards serve for a stated period and may not succeed
themselves.

(c) A special ex officio commission consisting of department heads
and engineers welded into a city planning committee, even though it
be not vested with powers as a committee, nevertheless contains in
itself, through the officials of the municipality, the necessary power
to form a very efficient commission, provided their terms be overlap-
ping and the body continuous.

(d) A commission composed of citizens who are not city officials
and who serve without pay is liable eventually to become less ef-
ficient. The members of such a commission are generally men whose
time is extremely valuable, and their attendance at numerous meet-
ings may ultimately affect seriously their private interests. If such a
commission be composed of members who receive remuneration and
give a certain definite portion of their time to the work, results might
be much better.

John K. Stauffer, Reading, Pa.:

As city planning contemplates the wisest and most comprehen-
sive development through a course of many years, and especially with
respect to far-sighted plans for the acquisition of areas necessary for
future park spaces and other public uses, determination of these prob-
lems should not be made a part of the routine work of short-term city
officials or their immediate subordinates in appointive positions. Men
elected or appointed to office for terms of two, three or four years
are expected to execute existing laws and enact such new regulations

[293]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

as may be found expedient for the most efficient management of
public affairs in the immediate present, i. e., for the one year for
which they are apportioning the available municipal revenues under
a budget, or in contemplation of the two, three or four year period
of their respective terms of service. The city planning authority, on
the other hand, should represent individual and collective vision,
soundness of judgment and fixity of purpose respecting city devel-
opment through decades to come. Once it convinces the community
that it possesses and is exercising these qualifications it may expect
an ever-increasing public support for the carrying out of its recom-
mendations, which is the essential need after the preparation of a
comprehensive plan. As a non-partisan board it should gain public
support in a larger measure than if the recommendations came from
a board of city officials whose election or appointment springs prima-
rily from political sources. To make progress in winning the support
of the entire municipality, regardless of all political complexities, it
appears best results may be expected from an appointive board of
five members, for instance, with the term of one member expir-
ing each year and his successor being designated for a five-year
term.

Municipalities pay their officials for service rendered in conduct-
ing the day by day administration along most efficient lines because
public sentiment is a unit as to its necessity. So long as the city plan-
ning authority is uncompensated, public sentiment may be expected
to consider such a board largely ornamental, lacking in real powers
and not vitally necessary to the city's present well-being and future
growth. If the city planners are compensated somewhat in propor-
tion to the time and interest they contribute to advancing the work
properly coming under their jurisdiction, the general public is likely
to be interested immediately to the extent of the cost to the public
treasury, to require satisfactory evidence of the performance of the
duties for which payment is made and to feel an increasing individual
and community interest in the personnel and public advantages
accruing from improvements accomplished.

Louis L. Tribus, New York City:

A board made up of the chief engineer of the board of estimate and
apportionment, chairman ex officio; five engineers, one nominated by
each borough president, salaried; one architect, nominated by the
mayor, salaried; five laymen, one representing each borough, to be
nominated by the mayor, fees; one secretary, appointed by the board
of estimate and apportionment. The five engineers and architect to
give constant service, also secretary, clerks, etc. ; the laymen and chief
engineer to act in advisory capacity, the former being paid only for
meetings attended where real service is given.

[294]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

George W. Tuttle, West New Brighton, N. Y.:

Some city planning office or authority should be created where it
does not exist, not necessarily single in large cities which are divided
into boroughs or other considerable units, nor need it be separate
from other civic duties in the case of small cities or towns, whose
function is to initiate a comprehensive plan and correlate particu-
lar improvements proposed, with its essential requirements, that a
scheme of orderly development may be provided.

It is believed that the office preparing the scheme should not have
the power to legalize the map, but that the function of criticism, adop-
tion or rejection should be intrusted to a commission made up of rep-
resentative men, say an engineer, an architect, a representative of
real estate interests, a representative of civic societies, etc., that the
plan may fairly represent public opinion and obtain public support.
The power to originate and adopt would be too great to rest in one in-
dividual, since he might have ideas quite different from those pre-
vailing in the community, or with other persons equally expert.

The authority originating the plan and correlating proposed im-
provements should usually be the city or borough engineer, as his
office usually has the facilities and data for such work.

Question 7. — Do you think it desirable that the city planning au-
thority should first develop its tentative comprehensive plan before
permitting itself to advise and recommend with reference to particular
problems?

Seventy-two replies were received; 46 answered this question in
the affirmative and 26 in the negative.

Extract from Replies to Question 7

B. A. Haldeman, Philadelphia, Pa.:

W The preparation of a tentative comprehensive plan is an undertak-
ing involving much investigation and labor and its proper devel-
opment will consume considerable time; in the event of the establish-
ment of a city planning department it should immediately be placed
in the position of being able authoritatively to advise and recommend
in the case of public improvements to be covered by the plan and over
which it is expected to exercise jurisdiction.

Question 8. — Should a state plan commission be created with
duties to investigate and report and give aid and advice to the local
planning authorities?

Sixty-six replies were received; 25 opposed a state plan commission;
20 were in favor of such a commission; 19 gave a qualified approval

[295]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

and 2 recommended that such a commission be a department of the
national government.

Extract from Replies to Question 8
John K. Stauffer, Reading , Pa.:

Appointment of a state plan commission would have a probable
tendency to arouse local interest in two ways : one through publicity
concerning what other cities are doing, and the other through expec-
tation that a state board may render favors without local expense.
Whatever stimulates public interest in city planning, so long as it
does not crush out local initiative, may be considered advantageous
to local growth. Correlation of the possible activities of cities of
similar size and facing similar problems would seem to be the most
evident advantage.

Question 9. — In taking land for street purposes, should authority
be conferred, either by statute or constitutional amendment, to deny
compensation for buildings erected within the lines of proposed streets
subsequent to the formal adoption of plans for such streets?

Sixty-six replies were received; 5 answers were in the negative, 53
in the affirmative and 8 gave a qualified approval.

Thomas Adams, Ottawa, Canada:

Of course, yes; except in so far as such compensation could have
been made a subject of claim prior to formal adoption. There are
also some directions in which legal power should be obtained to limit
claims that can now be made. In Canada and Britain it is legal to fix
building lines without giving the owner a right to claim compensa-
tion, and in all fairness to owners, why not — if they are all treated
alike under a statutory scheme? Except under legislative powers,
however, no method that is equitable to owners can be employed to
restrict the use of property, and that is one reason why city planning
which is not preceded by legislation must be largely ineffective.

B. A. Haldeman, Philadelphia, Pa.:

The city planning authority should be invested with sufficient power
to protect the plans officially established by it from encroachment by
private improvements or changes which might impair their useful-
ness and prohibit or greatly increase the cost of carrying them into
effect. It might be necessary to devise some means for making com-
pensation for actual losses suffered by individuals through the delay
in carrying out the plans.

Otto W. Davis, Minneapolis, Minn.:

Impossible to answer by either yes or no. Compensation should
be denied where the owner loses nothing by being deprived of the

[296]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

privilege of locating a building on the site for a proposed street. This
would apply to undeveloped land on the outskirts of the city. Com-
pensation should be made when land available for building purposes
only is deprived of such use and yet not immediately taken by the
city for street purposes. It is easy to conceive that a man might
own a valuable vacant lot on which he intended to erect a building
and that this lot would be so located as to be wholly included or so
nearly included in the proposed street as to make it impossible either
to sell or to use any portion of it for building purposes. Such an
owner should, of course, be compensated and the improvement
charged up to the owners of benefited property.

William C. Stanton, Philadelphia, Pa.:

Buildings located within the lines of proposed streets subsequent
to their formal confirmation or adoption should be prohibited. No
new structures or improvements to existing structures should be per-
mitted except when such streets, although adopted, will not be opened
for some considerable period, in which case certain additions and
improvements might be allowed by the building department of
the city after due investigation of all the circumstances. Some
equitable arrangement should be made to compensate property
owners for losses sustained owing to the neglect of a munici-
pality to complete improvements contemplated within a reasonable
period.

Howard E. Taylor, Pittsfield, Mass.:

My definite opinion is that there should be no authority conferred
either by statute or constitutional amendment to deny compensa-
tion for buildings erected within the lines of the proposed streets,
subsequent to the formal adoption of plans for such streets. My
reason for this opinion is that a city planning authority might adopt
its tentative plan for future city building and then for one reason or
another be delayed in carrying out the same for a period of years.
It also might, for good reasons arising after having adopted such
plans, cancel the same and substitute an entirely new plan. In
such event the property owner, parts of whose property had been
included in the tentative plan previously adopted, should not lose
the ad interim right to improve his own property for his own
profit, provided that such improvement is made <in good faith and
not purely for the purpose of forcing the city to pay him exorbitant
compensatory damages when his property is condemned for public
purposes. As a corollary it follows that the court of jurisdiction
should have the power of reviewing all condemnation cases arising
when the city planning authority takes private property for public
purposes.

[297]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

Question 10. — Should powers similar to those contained in the
English Town Planning Act be vested in the local authorities?

Fifty-nine replies were received; 55 replied in the affirmative and
4 in the negative.

Extracts from Certain Replies to Question 10
Thomas Adams, Ottawa, Canada:

I prefer the powers in the Nova Scotia act. No other method can
lead to success in a democratic country than either the English or the
Canadian acts, subject to adaptation to conditions in the States.
The only alternatives are autocratic powers, which I imagine would
not be acceptable in the States.

Harland Bartholomew, Newark, N. J.:

These powers accomplish the very results for which city planning
here in America is striving. Proper community development is im-
possible without them.

Edward M. Bassett, New York City:

The English Town Planning Act points the direction for our states
to follow better than the precedents of any other country. It fits
itself to our ideas of popular government and home rule. We should
work toward something of the sort.

G. Frank Beer, Toronto, Canada:

No. The powers vested in the Local Government Board (Great
Britain) are entirely too important and too far reaching to be left to
local authorities.

Otto W. Davis, Minneapolis, Minn.:

The English Town Planning Act appealed very strongly to our
committee and we undertook to develop a plan and prepare a bill for a
similar act in Minnesota. We found the way strewn with so many
difficulties that, one by one, the features of the act had to be given
up until very little indeed was left. Will enclose copy of the bill
which was introduced, but got no further than the committee. The
passage of this bill would have done wonders for our local situation,
as most of the future development of Minneapolis is certain to be
within Hennepin County. At present there are 23 political divisions
in the county accepting plats. Our committee deems town planning
as worked out by the English, namely, that designed to prevent bad
developments in the future, of more immediate importance by far
for Minneapolis than the correction of existing evils, the development
of a civic center, etc., although there is no reason why the two should
not be "married," as an English town planner expressed it last

[298]

CITY PLANNING CONFERENCE

summer. The point of view of our committee is given in the enclosed
leaflet.

Our city is growing very rapidly and there is every indication that
it will continue to grow equally rapidly for many years, largely be-
cause of the tremendous development that is taking place throughout
the whole Northwest. If we grow at the same rate as during the last
census decade, we double in about 17 years, will have over a million
population in 25 years and over two million population in 50 years
from the last census.

Some of us feel that American city planning has made a serious
mistake in confining its activities almost wholly to land within the
city limits. The problem which presses upon Minneapolis is that of
properly planning the land lying immediately outside the city limits.

B. A. Haldeman, Philadelphia, Pa.:

I believe the city planning body should be clothed with pretty
much the same authority as is conferred upon the Local Government
Board by the British Town Planning Act, but I believe that the au-
thority for creating and the organization for carrying the plans into
effect should be somewhat different from those prescribed by the
British act.

George W. Tuttle, West New Brighton, N. Y.:

Whether by adaptation of the British Town Planning Act or other-
wise, some means should be found whereby the plan arrived at may be
carried out by individuals and corporations, as well as by the public
authorities. It is of little use to have an adequate plan on paper if
it is to be ignored by real estate interests and property developed and
improved on narrow, badly located streets laid out without regard to
the plan. The plan, however, will ultimately have to conform to those
streets by reason of the great expense and destruction involved in any
change. Methods of private development and the policies of cities
as to their plan are too far apart.

[299]

TOPICAL INDEX

Only the more important topics which are not plainly indicated
by the titles of the articles are here indexed.

PAGH

Alleys 47, 48, 56, 69

Art Commissions and Plan Commissions 139

Canadian Planning Activities 164-165

Continuity in City Planning 19-20

Excess Taking of Land 38-39

Exhibits on City Planning 39

Courses in City Planning 40

Engineer, the Municipal, as a City Planner 11-12

English City Planning Legislation 153; 161

Italian City Planning Legislation 152

Lot Dimensions 49, 59-60; 68; 88ff.; lOlff.

Standards of 47; 50; 51

Lot Design 15-16

Lot and Block Units 7-8

Mandatory or Permissive City Planning 140; 165; 171; 174; 178-179; 184

Park Facilities 8-9

Plan of Detroit 24ff.

Plan Commissions

Composition of 138, 171; 181

Functions of 139-141; 172

Legislation creating 35-37

Prussian City Planning Legislation 149

Recreation Facilities 8-9

River Front of Detroit 31-32

Public Buildings, Location of 9-10

Restrictions on the Use of Land 16-17; 47

[301]

TOPICAL INDEX

PAGE

State Supervision of City Planning 143; 162ff .

Street Car Routing, Detroit 29ff.

Street Systems 5; 13-14

of Detroit 22ff.

of New York City 6

Municipal Control of 182ff.; 190

Tentative Plans 155-156; 188

Zoning 37

[302]

S6RTA